5.  The applicant was born in 1937 and lives in Norrnäs. 6.  The applicant was born out of wedlock. His mother, grandmother and everyone around him always considered N.S. as his father. N.S. never married or had other children. 7.  On 1 October 1976 the Paternity Act came into force. The transitional provisions in the Implementing Act of the Paternity Act state that paternity proceedings with regard to a child born before the entry into force of the law had to be initiated within five years, that is, before 1 October 1981. Moreover, no claim could be examined after the death of the father. No such restrictions exist for children born after the entry into force of the Paternity Act. 8.  N.S. was placed under guardianship in 2000. 9.  In May 2002 the applicant requested the Korsholm District Court (käräjäoikeus, tingsrätten) to establish paternity. The court ordered DNA tests, which established with 99.4 % certainty that N.S. was the applicant's biological father. 10.  On 7 April 2003 the District Court dismissed the applicant's claim. It found that as the applicant was born before the entry into force of the Paternity Act, he should have lodged his claim within the time-limit of five years, that is, before 1 October 1981. As he had lodged his claim only in May 2002, his claim was time-barred. 11.  The applicant appealed to the Vasa Appeal Court (hovioikeus, hovrätten) claiming, inter alia, that the paternity of N.S. could not be established otherwise as, due to his state of health, he could no longer make a legally valid acknowledgement of paternity with respect to the applicant. This fact would place the applicant in a worse position vis-à-vis the children who were born after the entry into force of the Paternity Act. N.S's guardian supported the claim to have paternity established. 12.  N.S. died in March 2004 while the case was pending before the Appeal Court. The inventory of his estate was made in June 2004. The estate, worth some 140,500 euros, was divided among N.S.'s siblings and their heirs. 13.  On 8 July 2004 the Appeal Court dismissed the applicant's appeal. 14.  The applicant appealed to the Supreme Court (korkein oikeus, högsta domstolen), reiterating his grounds of appeal already presented before the Appeal Court. 15.  On 14 April 2005 the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal.