4.  The applicant was born in 1961 and lives in Zakroczym. 5.  On 4 March 1986 the applicant’s mother lodged with the Nowy Dwór Mazowiecki District Court (Sąd Rejonowy) a motion for the dissolution of a co-ownership and division of an inheritance. The estate comprised, inter alia, a farm and plots of land located in Zakroczym. The applicant and her brother were also involved in the proceedings as parties. 6.  Between 4 March 1986 and 3 April 1992 the court scheduled fifteen hearings and appointed three experts. In the meantime, the applicant lodged several complaints about the unreasonable length of the proceedings, to no avail. 7.  On 3 April 1992 the court stayed the proceedings. They were resumed on 24 July 1995. 8.  Between 16 August 1995 and 14 May 2002 the court scheduled twenty-three hearings, thirteen of which were adjourned for various reasons, for instance the need to obtain additional evidence, in particular several experts’ reports. Three hearings were adjourned at the applicant’s request. 9.  On 14 May 2002 the court closed the trial and adjourned delivery of a decision. On 28 May 2002 the same court re-opened the proceedings and ordered that additional evidence be obtained, including experts’ reports. 10.  On 17 November 2002 the applicant’s brother died and the proceedings were stayed. They were resumed on an unspecified date in 2003. 11.  Between 20 February 2003 and 1 June 2007 the court ordered four expert reports to be obtained and scheduled sixteen hearings, five of which were adjourned. 12.  The proceedings are pending before the first-instance court. 13.  On 5 September 2005 the applicant lodged with the Warszawa Regional Court (Sąd Okręgowy) a complaint under the Law of 17 June 2004 on complaints about a breach of the right to a trial within a reasonable time (Ustawa o skardze na naruszenie prawa strony do rozpoznania sprawy w postępowaniu sądowym bez nieuzasadnionej zwłoki) (“the 2004 Act”). 14.  The applicant sought a ruling declaring that the length of the proceedings before the Nowy Dwór Mazowiecki District Court had been excessive and an award of just satisfaction in the amount of 10,000 Polish zlotys (PLN) (approx. EUR 2,500). 15.  On 7 October 2005 the Warszawa Regional Court dismissed her complaint on the ground that on the date of the entry into force of the 2004 Act no undue delays in the proceedings could be discerned. Although the court acknowledged in general that the proceedings before 2004 had been unreasonably lengthy, it did not examine the course of the proceedings prior to the date of the entry into force of the 2004 Act. It stressed that the provisions of the 2004 Act could be applied only to proceedings pending after 17 September 2004.