4.  The applicant was born in 1938 and lives in Zagreb. 5.  On 8 March 1993 the applicant instituted civil proceedings against an insurance company (“the respondent”) seeking compensation for damage caused by a fire in her house. On 2 July 1993 the Zagreb Municipal Court (Općinski sud u Zagrebu) dismissed her claim. 6.  On appeal, on 6 February 1996 the Zagreb County Court (Županijski sud u Zagrebu) quashed the first-instance judgment and remitted the case. 7.  In the resumed proceedings, the court held several hearings and heard two witnesses through the Biograd Municipal Court (Općinski sud u Biogradu). On 1 June 1999 the Zagreb Municipal Court gave a new judgment awarding the applicant the damages in part. Both parties appealed. 8.  On 5 December 2000 the Zagreb County Court again quashed the first-instance judgment and remitted the case. 9.  In the resumed proceedings, on 8 March 2001 the court requested the applicant to provide the addresses of the witnesses she had proposed. The applicant did not comply with this request. 10.  The court held further hearings on 22 November 2002, 4 April, 12 September and 5 December 2003. 11.  On 5 October 2004 the court gave judgment accepting the applicant’s claim in part. 12.  Both parties appealed and the proceedings are still pending before the second-instance court. 13.  Meanwhile, on 31 October 2002 the applicant filed a constitutional complaint concerning the length of the proceedings. On 9 April 2003 the Constitutional Court (Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske) dismissed her complaint as ill-founded, finding that the competent courts acted expeditiously and that the only delay in the proceedings (between 8 March 2001 and 22 November 2002) was attributable to the applicant on account of her failure to provide the addresses of the proposed witnesses.