4.  The applicant was born in 1948 and lives in Volgograd, Volgograd region. 5.  According to the applicant, on an unspecified date in March or April 1999 he brought a court action against a local Welfare Office before the Traktorozavodskoy District Court of Volgograd (“the District Court”). He claimed an increase in the rate of disability allowance due to him as a Chernobyl victim, that the increase should be backdated and that the unpaid amounts should be recovered. The Government submitted that the applicant lodged his claims on 16 August 1999. 6.  On 27 October 1999 the District Court rejected the applicant’s claims. On 14 January 2000 the Volgograd Regional Court (“the Regional Court”) upheld that judgment. 7.  On 21 May 2001 the Presidium of the Regional Court quashed the judgment of 27 October 1999, as upheld on 14 January 2000, and remitted the case for fresh examination to the first-instance court on the grounds that the lower courts had failed to apply the appropriate substantive law. 8.  On 3 July 2001 the District Court granted the applicant’s claims. It determined a new rate of monthly disability allowance and recovered the unpaid amounts. On 14 November 2001 the Regional Court upheld that judgment. 9.  On 20 December 2002 the Presidium of the Regional Court, in the presence of the applicant, quashed the judgment of 3 July 2001, as upheld on 14 November 2001, and remitted the case for fresh examination to the first-instance court on the grounds that the above decisions had been made in breach of procedural and substantive law. 10.  On 25 December 2002 the judgment of 3 July 2001 was enforced in so far as it had recovered the unpaid amounts. 11.  On 27 December 2002 the District Court received the case for examination. Between 3 February and 1 September 2003 the proceedings were suspended pending the examination by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of a question relating to the application by the courts of the legislation on social protection of Chernobyl victims. 12.  On 8 September 2003 the District Court granted the applicant’s claims. On 29 October 2003 the Regional Court quashed that judgment on appeal and remitted the case for fresh examination to the District Court on the grounds that the latter had failed to apply the appropriate law and had not complied with the ruling of the Presidium of the Regional Court of 20 December 2002. 13.  On 12 January 2004 the District Court granted the applicant’s claims. It determined a new rate of monthly disability allowance and recovered the unpaid amounts. On 24 March 2004 the Regional Court upheld that judgment. 14.   In April 2004 the legislation governing the social protection of Chernobyl victims was modified and established a new rate of monthly disability allowance which was higher than that determined by the judgment of 12 January 2004. 15.  On 16 March and 26 May 2005 the applicant received the amounts awarded by the judgment of 12 January 2004. 16.  Subsequently, the applicant lodged several applications for supervisory review of the judgment of 12 January 2004, as upheld on 24 March 2004. He considered that those decisions were unlawful. However, the judicial authorities refused to refer the case for examination on the merits to a supervisory review court.