6.  The applicants, Mr Gheorghe Ceachir, who was born in 1931, and Mr Ion Ceachir, who was born in 1940, live in Chişinău and Bălţi, respectively. 7.  In 1949 the applicants' parents were persecuted by the communist authorities. Their property was confiscated and they were exiled to Siberia. 8.  In 1989 they were rehabilitated. 9.  On 2 August 2002 the applicants brought an action against the Ministry of Finance (“the Ministry”), seeking compensation for the confiscation of their parents' property. 10.  On 27 May 2003 the Râşcani District Court ruled in favour of the applicants and ordered the Ministry to pay each of them compensation in the amount of 150,500 Moldovan lei (MDL) (8,988 euros (EUR) at the time). It also issued an enforcement warrant. The Ministry appealed. 11.  On 14 August 2003 the Chişinău Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgment of 27 May 2003. The representative of the Ministry did not attend the hearing. 12.  On 29 August 2003 the Ministry lodged with the Supreme Court of Justice an appeal on points of law, dated 28 August 2003. 13.  Relying on Articles 437 and 438 of the Code of Civil Procedure (the “CCP”) (see Relevant domestic law below), on 15 September 2003 the Vice-President of the Supreme Court of Justice returned the Ministry's appeal on points of law on the ground that the latter had failed to pay court fees. He also informed the Ministry that it could lodge a renewed appeal on points of law after having remedied previous omissions and after having complied with other legal requirements. 14.  On 1 October 2003 the bailiff of the Râşcani Judicial Decisions Enforcement Department received the enforcement warrant of 27 May 2003 and on 7 October 2003 he requested the Ministry to enforce it. 15.  On 18 November 2003 the Ministry informed the bailiff that it had lodged an appeal on points of law against the judgment of 14 August 2003 and that it would comply with the enforcement warrant only after the examination of the appeal on points of law by the Supreme Court. 16.  In the meantime, on 13 November 2003 the Ministry allegedly sent a letter to the Supreme Court of Justice and argued that according to the law “on the State duty” (privind taxa de stat) it was exempted from paying court fees during the examination of the appeal on points of law. 17.  On 8 December 2003 the Ministry lodged with the Supreme Court of Justice a new appeal on points of law against the judgment of 14 August 2003. Its content was identical to that of 29 August 2003 and bore the same date on which it had been drafted by the Ministry – 28 August 2003. The Ministry did not request the reinstatement of the running of the legal time-limit for lodging the new appeal on points of law, nor did it mention the issue of court fees. 18.  On 20 May 2004 the applicants lodged with the Supreme Court of Justice their observations on the Ministry's appeal on points of law and argued, inter alia, that it had been lodged out of time. 19.  On 26 May 2004 the Supreme Court of Justice upheld the Ministry's appeal on points of law, quashed the judgments of 27 May and 14 August 2003 and ordered a retrial of the case by the Sângerei District Court. The Supreme Court specifically mentioned in its judgment that the Ministry had lodged the appeal on points of law on 8 December 2003. 20.  On 4 October 2004 the Sângerei District Court partially upheld the applicants' action and ordered the Ministry to pay each of them compensation of MDL 36,250 (EUR 2,402 at the time). On 22 October 2004 the applicants lodged an appeal with the Bălţi Court of Appeal. 21.  By a decision of 7 December 2004 the Bălţi Court of Appeal dismissed the applicants' appeal on the ground that it had been lodged out of time. The applicants appealed against this decision. 22.  On 13 April 2005 the Supreme Court of Justice upheld the appeal, quashed the decision of 7 December 2004 and ordered that the case be retried before the Bălţi Court of Appeal. 23.  On 7 July 2005 the Bălţi Court of Appeal dismissed the applicants' appeal against the judgment of 4 October 2004. They lodged an appeal on points of law with the Supreme Court of Justice. 24.  On 9 November 2005, during the proceedings before the Supreme Court, the applicants sought to withdraw their appeal on points of law and to discontinue the proceedings. On the same date their request was upheld and the proceedings discontinued. 25.  On 16 January 2006 the applicants lodged with the Supreme Court of Justice a revision request against its decision of 9 November 2005 by which it discontinued the proceedings. On 24 May 2006 their request was refused. 26.  On 17 July 2007 a bailiff requested the Ministry to enforce the judgment of the Sângerei District Court of 4 October 2004. 27.  On 11 August 2006 the Ministry lodged an appeal against the judgment of 4 October 2004, which was dismissed by the final judgment of 7 February 2007 of the Supreme Court of Justice as statute-barred. 28.  On 28 March 2007 a bailiff enforced the judgment of 4 October 2004 and paid the applicants MDL 36,250 each.