4.  The applicants were born in 1930 and 1934 respectively and live in Irkutsk. 5.  The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 6.  On 22 December 1986 the Irkutsk regional administration ordered expropriation of the applicants' plot of land, house and certain constructions in the public interest and transferred them to the State enterprise “Vostok”. The actual transfer took place in 1992. 7.  On 27 January 1993 the first applicant reached an agreement with “Vostok” by which the enterprise undertook to move the applicant's garage and cellar to his new place of residence. By a decision of the same date, the Sverdlovskiy District Court of the Irkutsk Region approved the agreement. It was later invalidated by domestic courts. 8.  On 22 September 1995 the Sverdlovskiy District Court allowed the applicants' civil claims against “Vostok” and awarded them compensation for the expropriated property. The applicants did not specify the amount awarded. It appears that the judgment became binding and enforceable on 2 October 1995. 9.  On 1 November 1996 and 13 March 2001 the District Court adjusted the award under the judgment of 22 September 1995 in line with the inflation. 10.  According to the judgments of 22 September 1995, 1 November 1996 and 13 March 2001, the federal State unitary enterprise “Vostok” (федеральное государственное унитарное предприятие “Восток”) was to pay 72,502.20 Russian roubles (“RUR”) to the first applicant and RUR 4,856.30 to the second applicant. 11.  On an unspecified date the bailiffs' service opened enforcement proceedings and placed the applicants on the waiting list, along with many others creditors of “Vostok”. 12.  On 28 January 2002 the Commercial Court of the Irkutsk Region started insolvency proceedings against “Vostok”. 13.  On 24 February 2004 the bailiff passed the enforcement documents to the company receiver. 14.  On an unspecified date the applicants brought civil proceedings against the Irkutsk City Administration, claiming that the Administration should be liable for the debts of the State enterprise. 15.  On 3 December 2003 the Kirovskiy District Court of Irkutsk dismissed their claim as having no basis in the domestic law. On 30 January 2004 the Irkutsk Regional Court upheld the judgment on appeal. 16.  It appears that the judgments of 22 September 1995, 1 November 1996 and 13 March 2001 have not been enforced to date, and that the insolvency proceedings against “Vostok” are still pending.