4.  The applicant is a private limited liability company with its registered office in Žilina. 5.  On 1 June 1995 the applicant filed an action with the Žilina District Court. It sued eight persons for a sum of money on grounds of unjust enrichment. 6.  On 20 November 1998 the case was transferred to the Čadca District Court and on 22 August 2001 to the Martin District Court upon decisions of the Žilina Regional Court as to bias on the part of judges. 7.  Subsequently, the Martin District Court obtained further evidence including expert opinions, delivered several procedural decisions and held four hearings. On 21 April 2008 it delivered a judgment. The parties appealed and in August 2008 the applicant informed the Court that the proceedings were still pending. 8.  On 5 April 2006 the Constitutional Court (Third Chamber) found that the Martin District Court had violated, and that the District Courts in Žilina and in Čadca had not violated, the applicant’s right under Article 48 § 2 of the Constitution to a hearing without unjustified delay. 9.  The Constitutional Court held that the case was complex in that expert evidence had to be adduced and related proceedings had been pending. The applicant company by its conduct had contributed to the length of the proceedings. The Martin District Court had failed to proceed in an appropriate manner and was responsible for delays totalling 16 months. 10.  The Constitutional Court awarded SKK 40,000 (the equivalent of 1,066 euros at that time) to the applicant as just satisfaction in respect of non-pecuniary damage. It also ordered the Martin District Court to avoid any further delay in the proceedings and to reimburse the applicant’s legal costs.