4.  The applicant was born in 1949 and lives in Požega. 5.  On 13 July 1990 the applicant lent a certain amount of money to T.T. who failed to pay it back within the agreed time-period. On 24 June 1992 the Požega Municipal Court gave judgment ordering T.T. to pay back the money to the applicant. 6.  As T.T. failed to pay, on 11 February 1998 the applicant submitted a motion for enforcement (prijedlog za ovrhu). On 12 February 1998 the Požega Municipal Court issued an enforcement order (rješenje o ovrsi) with a view to seizing T.T.'s movable property. On 17 March 1998 T.T. filed an appeal against that order, which was dismissed by the Požega County Court on 10 November 1998. 7.  On 2 December 1998 the Municipal Court decided to register and evaluate T.T.'s movables, including his car. 8.  On 7 December 1998 T.T.'s wife, D.T., filed an objection with the court, claiming that she was the owner of the car which had been registered as T.T.'s property. 9.  On 26 July 1999 the Municipal Court instructed D.T. to institute civil proceedings against the applicant, in order to declare the enforcement on the car inadmissible. On 25 August 1999 D.T. filed a civil action against the applicant to that end. The court accordingly stayed the enforcement proceedings. Subsequently, on 27 March 2001 D.T. withdrew her claim and the enforcement proceedings resumed. 10.  On 27 May 2002 the Municipal Court scheduled an on-site inspection for 20 June 2002 with a view to seizing T.T.'s car. However, the court bailiff failed to seize the car. 11.  On 26 November 2002 the court scheduled another on-site inspection for 17 December 2002. However, the court decision could not be served on T.T. because he had meanwhile changed his residence. 12.  Subsequently, on 15 October 2003 the parties concluded a court settlement. On 5 May 2004 the applicant's lawyer withdrew the enforcement request. Accordingly, on 6 May 2004 the Požega Municipal Court issued a decision terminating the enforcement proceedings.