4.  The applicant lives in the town of Polevskoy in the Sverdlovsk Region. 5.  On 6 September 1999 the applicant lodged an action before the Polevskoy Town Court (“the Town Court”) against his employer, a municipal housing company, seeking wage arrears and compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage due to delays in the payment of his wages. The case was assigned to Judge U. 6.  It appears that no hearings were held until 5 June 2000. Meanwhile, the applicant amended his claims and submitted additional evidence on two occasions. He also complained to the Sverdlovsk Regional Judicial Qualifications Board about inactivity on the part of Judge U. 7.  On 5 June 2000, the Town Court adjourned the proceedings in order to allow the applicant to correct certain procedural defects in his claim. 8.  On 5 September 2000 the Sverdlovsk Regional Court (“the Regional Court”), following a complaint by the applicant, quashed the decision of 5 June 2000 as unlawful and remitted the case to the Town Court for examination on the merits. The first hearing was scheduled for 22 January 2001. Meanwhile, the applicant amended his claims. 9.   The hearing of 22 January 2001 was adjourned because of the judge’s involvement in other proceedings and the next hearing was listed for 28 March 2001. 10.  The hearing of 28 March 2001 was postponed following an application by the applicant to have his claims amended. 11.  The next hearing, scheduled for 15 May 2001, was adjourned at the respondent’s request. 12.  The following hearing, listed for 8 November 2001, was adjourned because the respondent failed to appear. 13.  Three hearings fixed for between 13 November 2001 and 17 December 2001 were adjourned at the respondent’s request. 14.  The hearing of 17 December 2001 was cancelled owing to the judge’s involvement in other proceedings. 15.  The next hearing, scheduled for 19 December 2001, was adjourned until 11 March 2002 at the applicant’s request, as he was going away. 16.  Of four hearings scheduled for March and April 2002, one was adjourned at the respondent’s request. 17.  The following hearing, scheduled for 14 June 2002, was adjourned until 4 November 2002 owing to the judge’s involvement in other proceedings. 18.   Hearings scheduled for 4 and 5 November 2002 were cancelled because the applicant failed to appear, and on 5 November 2002 the Town Court decided to leave the applicant’s action unexamined because he had failed to appear at two hearings without providing any explanation for his absence. The applicant lodged an appeal against that decision, complaining that in fact he had not been summoned to the two hearings in question. 19.  On 25 March 2003 the Sverdlovsk Regional Court quashed the decision of 5 November 2002, finding that there was no evidence that the applicant had been duly summoned to the hearings of 4 and 5 November 2002. The case was returned to Judge U. for an examination on the merits. The hearing was scheduled for 24 April 2003 and was held as planned. 20.  The hearing scheduled for 19 May 2003 was adjourned until 20 May 2003 following a request by the applicant to study the case file. 21.  The next three hearings, scheduled for between 20 May 2003 and 18 June 2003, were adjourned because the respondent failed to appear. 22.  Hearings fixed for between 30 June 2003 and 2 October 2003 were cancelled owing to the judge’s involvement in other proceedings. For the same reason, no hearings were held during the periods 21 October 2003 to 13 November 2003 and 24 December 2003 to 20 February 2004. 23.  A hearing scheduled for 12 March 2004 was adjourned until 15 March 2004 at the applicant’s request. 24.  On 15 March 2004 the applicant amended his claims. Six further hearings were held as planned. 25.  A hearing scheduled for 7 April 2004 was adjourned until 9 April 2004 at the applicant’s request. 26.  Three hearings fixed for between 22 April 2004 and 4 June 2004 were cancelled owing to the judge’s involvement in other proceedings or because he was ill. 27.  On 10 June 2004 the case was reassigned to judge G. A hearing was scheduled for 23 September 2004. 28.  On 23 September 2004 the Town Court dismissed the applicant’s action. 29.  On 9 November 2004 the Regional Court upheld the judgment on appeal.