10.  The applicant was born in 1926 and lives in Gliwice, Poland. 11.  On 18 September 1985 the applicant sued the “Domek” building co‑operative (Spółdzielcze Zrzeszenie Budowy Domków Jednorodzinnych “Domek”) in the Kraków Regional Court (Sąd Wojewódzki), seeking damages for the incomplete and defective construction of her house. 12.  Before 1 May 1993 the Court held eight hearings and obtained several expert opinions. 13.  On 3 June, 27 September and 25 November 1993 the Regional Court held hearings. 14.  On 25 January 1994 the trial court stayed the proceedings, finding that the applicant had not specified her claim. On 17 February 1995 the court resumed the proceedings. The court held further hearings on 10 April and 30 October 1995. 15.  On 10 October 1996 the applicant challenged the impartiality of the presiding judge. On 7 November 1996 the Kraków Regional Court dismissed her challenge. On 9 May 1997 the Kraków Court of Appeal (Sąd Apelacyjny) dismissed the applicant’s further appeal. 16.  At the hearing held on 18 September 1997 the court heard evidence from an expert. Further hearings were held on 2 October and 24 November 1997. 17.  On 8 December 1997 the Kraków Regional Court gave judgment and dismissed the applicant’s claim. On 9 February 1998 the applicant lodged an appeal against this decision. 18.  On 9 October and 8 December 1998 the Kraków Court of Appeal held hearings. On 18 December 1998 the Kraków Court of Appeal upheld the first-instance judgment. 19.  On 12 March 1999 the applicant lodged a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court. The proceedings were terminated by a decision of the Supreme Court of 26 October 2001. 20.  On 9 May 1990 the applicant sued the “Domek” building co‑operative in the Kraków District Court (Sąd Rejonowy) seeking annulment of a resolution divesting her of membership in the co-operative. 21.  The court held hearings on 19 June and 18 September 1990. On 26 November 1990 the trial court stayed the proceedings as it considered that their determination depended on the outcome of the proceedings concerning the action for damages (described above). On 20 March 1991 the Kraków Regional Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal against this decision. 22.  On 27 June 1993 the applicant asked the President of the Kraków Regional Court to resume the proceedings. On 6 July 1993 the President replied that he was not competent to make procedural decisions in the proceedings. 23.  On 28 December 1993 the applicant asked the Kraków District Court to resume the proceedings. On 30 December 1993 the court refused her request, referring to the reasons given in the decision of 26 November 1990. On 31 May 1994 the Kraków Regional Court dismissed the applicant’s further appeal. 24.  On 18 June 1997 the District Court discontinued the proceedings finding that they had been stayed for over three years and that the parties had not requested that they be resumed. On 1 July 1997 the applicant appealed against this decision. On 8 October 1997 the Regional Court quashed it. 25.  On 5 June 1998 the applicant again asked the trial court to resume the proceedings. On 16 June 1998 the Kraków District Court refused her request. 26.  On 15 October 2002 the District Court resumed the proceedings. On 30 January 2003 the court gave judgment and dismissed the applicant’s claim. On 12 March 2003 the applicant lodged an appeal with the Regional Court. 27.  It appears that they are still pending.