4.  The applicant was born in 1930 and lives in Trenčín. 5.  On 8 April 1994 the applicant lodged an action against his employer with the Banská Bystrica Regional Court (Krajský súd). He sought financial compensation for the latter’s use of four of his inventions and one industrial design which related to the applicant’s job with the employer and to which the applicant had a 50% title. 6.  A hearing called for 23 June 1994 was rescheduled on the applicant’s request and took place on 21 July 1994. The defendant did not appear and the hearing was adjourned. The Regional Court invited the applicant to submit a list of all owners of the intellectual property at issue and a list of experts who could assess the property’s value. The applicant submitted this information in letters of 26 July and 1 August 1994. 7.  On 8 December 1994 the Regional Court requested that the Trenčín District Court examine witnesses. The examination took place on 29 December 1994. 8.  In a letter of 5 February 1996 the President of the Regional Court acknowledged that for a long period of time there had been no progress in the case. The letter stated that the judge to whom the action was assigned had originally not been authorised to acquaint herself with classified information that was relevant to the case. The authorisation was granted on 20 November 1995 and only thereafter could the judge proceed with the matter. 9.  On 21 April 1997 the Regional Court held a hearing. On 12 November 1997 it enquired of the Ministry of Defence whether it was possible to inspect the subject‑matter of the action. On 11 March 1998 the Regional Court appointed an expert to make a technical assessment of its value. At the same time the parties were ordered to pay a deposit towards the expert’s expenses. The defendant lodged an appeal against this order. 10.  On 28 May 1998 the expert submitted his report. On 1 December the Supreme Court (Najvyšší súd) dismissed the defendant’s appeal concerning the payment of his expenses. 11.  In the meantime the applicant had submitted and later withdrawn a request that the action be transferred to another court. A similar request was submitted by the defendant and dismissed by the Supreme Court on 18 September 1997. 12.  On 25 January 1999 the Bratislava Regional Court declared the defendant company insolvent. Pursuant to Article 14 § 1 (d) of the Bankruptcy and Composition Code (Law no. 328/1991 Coll., as amended), all judicial proceedings against it, including the applicant’s action, were thus automatically ex lege stayed. 13.  Despite the insolvency order, on 14 April 1999, the Banská Bystrica Regional Court held a hearing at which the defendant failed to appear. 14.  On 27 April 1999 the Banská Bystrica Regional Court gave a formal decision to stay the proceedings in the applicant’s action under Article 14 § 1 (d) of the Bankruptcy and Composition Code. On 20 April 2001 the bankruptcy trustee requested under Article 14 § 5 of that Code that the proceedings resume. 15.  On 16 May 2001, following a hearing held on the same day, the Banská Bystrica Regional Court granted a major part of the action and dismissed the remainder. No party challenged the judgment by an appeal and it became final and binding on 2 July 2001. 16.  At an unspecified time the applicant registered his claim under the judgment of 16 May 2001 in the insolvency proceedings which are still pending.