5. The applicant, Vili Kveder, was a Slovenian national born in 1904, who lived in Vojnik. He died on 20 July 2000. His son and heir, Mr Viljem (Vili) Kveder, wished to pursue his father’s application before the Court. 6.  On 15 January 1963 the applicant entered into a contract for the sale of 37,331 m2 of his land to the State Company. He alleged that he had been forced by the State to conclude such a contract.
On 18 January 1965 the Celje administrative authorities nationalized the land in question. 7.  On 29 August 1990 the applicant lodged an application with the administrative authorities of Celje. 8.  On 24 January 1992 he lodged a formal request for the restitution of his property under the 1991 Denationalisation Act. 9.  According to the applicant, he was instructed by the administrative authorities to institute proceedings also before the Celje Basic Court (Temeljno sodišče) (see below). 10.  On 13 July 1992 the administrative authorities held a meeting with the applicant. 11.  On 23 March 1993 the administrative authorities informed HKŽ, the entity holding the land in question, that the restitution claim had been lodged. On 9 April 1993 the latter responded to the claim. 12.  On 24 February 1995 the State Attorney’s Office requested a copy of the purchase agreement and other documents from the administrative authorities. On 5 July 1995 the latter prepared a response. On 10 January 1996 HKŽ submitted the requested documents. 13.  On 18 September 1997 a hearing was held. The applicant was represented by his son Vili. 14.  On 26 September 1997 the (renamed) Celje Administrative Unit (Upravna enota) terminated the proceedings, considering that the courts enjoyed jurisdiction in the present case. 15.  On 24 October 1997 the file was transferred to the Celje District Court. 16.  On 20 January 2000 the Celje District Court requested the Celje Administrative Unit to submit its file for review. The latter responded on 10 February 2000. 17.  On 15 March 2001 the Celje District Court instituted a dispute on jurisdiction. 18.  On 5 April 2001 the Constitutional Court ruled that the administrative authorities enjoyed jurisdiction. 19.  On 11 May 2001 the Celje Administrative Unit received the file from the Celje District Court. 20.  On 24 October 2001 the applicant’s son, Mr Vili Kveder, informed the authorities of his father’s death and that he continued the proceedings as his legal heir. 21.  On 26 February 2002 a notice of the lodging of the denationalisation claim was submitted to the liable entity. 22.  On 5 March 2002 the applicant filed submissions. 23.  On 11 March 2002 the parties were summoned for a hearing and on 26 March 2002 a hearing was held. 24.  On 27 March 2002 a financial expert was designated. 25.  On 8 and 11 April 2002 a certificate of the cadastral state was submitted. 26.  On 16 April 2002 the applicant filed new documents. 27.  On 22 April 2002 the expert was summoned. 28.  On 3 July 2002 the expert established her schedule of costs. 29.  On 4 July 2002 the administrative authorities ordered the applicant to make payment of a provision to the valuation expert. On 31 July 2002 the applicant appealed against the decision. 30.  On 14 August 2002 the file was transferred to the appellate authority. 31.  On 7 February 2003 the Ministry quashed the decision and returned the case for re-examination to the Celje Administrative Unit. 32.  On 11 March 2003 the expert drew up an opinion. 33.  On 13 March 2003 a hearing was held. 34.  On 1 April 2003 the Celje Administrative Unit transferred a part of the applicant’s claim to the Slovenian Compensation Society (Slovenska odškodninska družba). On the same day, it rendered an estimation of the value of the indemnity paid to the applicant and his wife after expropriation. 35.  On 7 April 2003 the Celje Administrative Unit issued a report. 36.  On 16 April 2003 a hearing was held. 37.  On 18 April 2003 the Celje Administrative Unit issued a report. 38.  On 23 April 2003 the Agricultural Land and Forestry Fund rendered an opinion. On 28 April 2003 the latter was transmitted to the applicant for comment. On 9 June 2003 further documents were transmitted to the applicant for comment. 39.  On 23 June 2003 the Celje Administrative Unit issued a report. 40.  On 28 June 2003 the applicant replied. 41.  On 16 July 2003 the Celje Administratrive Unit issued a decision partly awarding the applicant the co-ownerhsip of the expropriated land. The applicant filed an appeal, claiming the immediate restitution of the land in natura. 42.  On 22 October 2003 the Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry and Food partly modified the first-instance decision and rejected the remainder of the applicant’s appeal. 43.  On 1 June 1993 the applicant instituted restitution proceedings also in the Celje Basic Court. 44.  On 13 December 1993 he extended his claim. 45.  On 12 August 1994 the applicant requested an accelerated treatment of his case. 46.  On 6 September 1994 the State-Attorney Office was invited to produce fresh evidence, which it did on 13 September 1994. 47.  On 20 September 1994 the applicant filed new submissions. 48.  On 29 September 1994 the court held a hearing. 49.  On 18 September 1995 the State-Attorney Office filed submissions. 50.  On 27 October 1995 the applicant filed submissions. 51.  On 21 April and 23 June 1997 hearings were held. 52.  On 17 March 1999 the Celje District Court (Okrajno sodišče - its new style further to the reform of 1995) held that the administrative authorities in charge of denationalisation proceedings in the applicant’s case enjoyed jurisdiction and dismissed his claims. 53.  The parties appealed and on 12 May 1999 the file was transferred to the appellate court. 54.  On 23 June 1999 the Celje Higher Court quashed the challenged decision and sent the case back before the Celje District Court. 55.  On 17 January 2000 the Celje District Court requested the Celje administrative authorities to submit its file for review. The latter responded on 11 February 2000. 56.  On 15 March 2001 the Celje District Court asked the Constitutional Court to rule as to whether jurisdiction lay with the judicial or administrative authorities. 57.  On 5 April 2001 the Constitutional Court held that it was the administrative authorities that enjoyed jurisdiction. The decision was served on the applicant on 18 April 2001. 58.  On 5 April 2001 the file was transferred to the Celje Administrative Unit.