4.  The applicants were born in 1954 and 1955 respectively, and live in Syktyvkar in the Komi Republic. They are both retired judges. 5.  On 26 September 1994 the Ezhvinskiy District Court of the Komi Republic allowed the first applicant's claim against the Yemva Town Council for provision of State housing, for which he was eligible as a judge. The court ordered the town council to:
“...grant or purchase for Mr Teterin, whose family comprises five members, a separate well-equipped flat or house taking account of the plaintiff's entitlement to one additional room or having a habitable surface of no less than 65 square metres, located near the Knyazhpogostskiy District Court in the town of Yemva”. 6.  No appeal was brought against the judgment and it became final and enforceable ten days later. 7.  In October 1994 enforcement proceedings were instituted. However, the judgment could not be enforced because the town authorities did not possess any available housing or the financial resources to purchase a flat. 8.  The applicants complained to the Courts Administration Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Court Bailiffs' Department of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation and the Court Bailiffs' Department of the Komi Republic Department of Justice. The responses received by the applicants in 2001 and 2002 indicated that the judgment could not be enforced as the town authorities had no available housing. 9.  In 2002 the first applicant applied to the Ezhvinskiy District Court with a request to change the method of execution of the judgment of 26 September 1994. He asked that the value of the flat be paid to him in cash. 10.  On 24 April 2002 the Ezhvinskiy District Court closed the proceedings for the amendment of the judgment as the first applicant had withdrawn his request. 11.  On 23 August 2002 a court bailiff reopened enforcement proceedings and ordered the Knyazhpogostskiy District Council to execute the judgment. 12.  On 30 January 2003 the enforcement proceedings were closed because enforcement was not possible. On the following day the writ of execution was returned to the first applicant. 13.  Further to the applicants' complaint, on 3 March 2003 the Knyazhpogostskiy District Court quashed the bailiff's decision to terminate the proceedings. 14.  The proceedings were resumed on 7 May 2003. The bailiff collected information on the cash flows and funds of the Yemva Town Council. 15.  On 7 July 2003 the bailiff discontinued the enforcement proceedings on account of the town council's lack of funds for the construction or purchase of housing. The writ of execution was returned to the Ezhvinskiy District Court. The first applicant submits that a copy of that decision was not served on him and that he first became aware of it upon receipt of the Government's memorandum of 1 December 2003, to which it was attached. 16.  On 19 January 2004 the Yemva Town Council offered the first applicant a two-room flat of 25 square metres with central heating. It noted that no State housing had been constructed since 1994 and that it was therefore not in a position to offer a flat with full amenities. The applicants did not accept the offer. On 17 December 2004 the enforcement proceedings were re-opened and they are now pending. 17.  The judgment of 26 September 1994 has not been enforced to date.