5.  The applicant was born in 1946 and lives in Cologne. 6.  On 15 November 1989 the applicant brought civil proceedings against his former partner of a civil-law partnership (Gesellschaft bürgerlichen Rechts) to stop the compulsory enforcement of certain cost orders (Kostenfestsetzungsbeschlüsse) issued by the Cologne Regional Court in respect of previous proceedings between them. 7.  On 29 November 1989 the Regional Court provisionally stayed the enforcement of the cost orders. On 22 January 1990 the Cologne Court of Appeal dismissed the defendant’s appeal against this decision. 8.  On 4 December 1989 the applicant further extended his action. 9.  On 30 March 1990 the Regional Court held an early first hearing (früher erster Termin) and announced a decision for 1 June 1990. 10.  On 8 May 1990 the applicant again further extended his action. 11.  On 1 June 1990 the Regional Court reopened the oral hearing and scheduled a new oral hearing for 21 December 1990, which was postponed at the applicant’s request and rescheduled for 8 February 1990. 12.  On 21 June 1990 and 21 August 1990 the applicant further extended or modified his action. 13.  On 17 December 1990 the defendant lodged a counterclaim (Widerklage) requesting the court inter alia to order the applicant to pay him approximately DEM 702,600 (approximately EUR 360,000), concerning claims resulting from the termination of their partnership in 1979. 14.  On 8 February 1991 the Regional Court held an oral hearing. 15.  On 12 April 1991 it commissioned an expert report on the applicant’s damages caused by the enforcement measures. 16.  On 2 December 1991 the defendant suggested to separate the counterclaim from the proceedings in order to speed up the proceedings. On 8 January 1992 the applicant opposed a separation, whereupon the Regional Court decided not to separate the proceedings. 17.  On 5 February 1992 the court appointed an expert after two other experts had declared that they would not be in a position to prepare the report. On 12 October 1992 the applicant submitted additional information to the expert with a delay of three months. On 24 June 1993 the expert finalised his report of 75 pages. 18.  On 28 March 1994 the defendant challenged the expert for bias. 19.  On 8 July 1994 the Regional Court held another oral hearing and announced a decision for 28 October 1994, which was later on rescheduled for 16 December 1994. 20.  On 5 August 1994 the court rejected the defendant’s challenge for bias. On 25 November 1994 the Cologne Court of Appeal quashed the Regional Court’s decision and found that the expert had been biased. 21.  On 16 December 1994 the Regional Court reopened the oral hearing. 22.  On 14 July 1995 the court held an oral hearing. 23.  On 17 November 1995 the Regional Court commissioned a fresh expert report. On 23 December 1997 the expert delivered his report of 41 pages. 24.  On 7 November 1996 the defendant again suggested to separate the counterclaim from the proceedings. On 26 November 1996 the applicant opposed a separation. 25.  A further hearing scheduled for 24 April 1998 was postponed twice. First, because the applicant had further questions to the expert, and later because the sitting judge was seconded to another court. 26.  On 6 November 1998 the court held an oral hearing. 27.  By partial judgment of 5 February 1999 the Regional Court dismissed the applicant’s action. The partial judgment comprised 32 pages. In respect of the defendant’s counterclaim it commissioned an expert report on the dissolution balance sheet (Auseinandersetzungsbilanz) submitted by the defendant and comprising more than 100 pages. 28.  The applicant appealed against the partial judgment. 29.  On 30 December 1999 the Cologne Court of Appeal quashed the Regional Court’s partial judgment of 5 February 1999 and remitted the case to this court. 30.  A hearing scheduled for 20 October 2000 was postponed to 12 January 2001 because of changes in the composition of the Regional Court’s chamber. On 12 January 2001 the court held an oral hearing and took evidence by hearing witnesses. 31.  On 3 May 2002 the Regional Court commissioned a further expert report on the dissolution balance sheet submitted by the defendant. 32.  In August 2002 the applicant asked for an extension of time-limit for submissions by four weeks due to friendly settlement negotiations which subsequently failed. 33.  On 31 March 2004 the expert finalised her report of 7 pages. On 7 April 2004 the court sent it to the parties for comments. 34.  On 7 January 2005 the Regional Court held another oral hearing. 35.  On 18 March 2005 it dismissed the applicant’s action, ordered him to pay the defendant some EUR 5,800 and dismissed the remainder of the counteraction. The judgment comprised 42 pages. 36.  Both parties appealed to the Cologne Court of Appeal. The applicant was granted an extension of the time-limit for reasoning his appeal twice. On 1 July 2005 the applicant submitted his statement of grounds for appeal and further extended his action. 37.  On 15 August 2005 the Court of Appeal scheduled an oral hearing for 27 April 2006, which was later on postponed to 16 May 2006. 38.  On 16 May 2006 the Court of Appeal held an oral hearing and announced a decision, which was postponed several times. 39.  On 14 May 2007 the Court of Appeal scheduled another hearing for 11 October 2007, which was postponed to 18 October 2007. 40.  On 8 November 2007 the Cologne Court of Appeal quashed the Regional Court’s judgment. It dismissed the applicant’s action and ordered him to pay the defendant EUR 170,564 plus interest at the annual rate of 4% from 3 January 1991. The judgment comprised 30 pages. 41.  On 8 December 2008 the Federal Court of Justice dismissed the applicant’s request to be granted leave to appeal on points of law.