4.  The applicant was born in 1955 and lives in Płock, Poland. 5.  On 7 March 1992 the applicant asked the Częstochowa District Court (Sąd Rejonowy) for a payment order against the “Westa” insurance company. 6.  The court refused the application on 22 June 1992. 7.  On 15 September 1992, on the applicant’s appeal, the Częstochowa Regional Court (Sąd Wojewódzki) remitted the case. 8.  On 15 December 1992 the District Court upheld its original decision. 9.  On 25 March 1993 the Częstochowa Regional Court dismissed the applicant’s further appeal. 10.  The case was subsequently examined by the District Court in ordinary civil proceedings. 11.  On 7 July 1993 the court stayed the proceedings because bankruptcy proceedings had been initiated against the defendant (that decision is obligatory under Polish civil procedure). 12.  On 14 December 1993 the Regional Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal against that decision. 13.  The applicant unsuccessfully asked the court several times to resume the proceedings. 14.   The court resumed the proceedings on 13 September 1996. 15.  Hearings were scheduled for 23 October 1996 and 8 July 1997. 16.  On 4 August 1997 the court ordered that expert evidence be obtained. It also ordered the applicant to pay an advance sum of money to cover the costs of the preparation of an expert report. 17.  On 16 April 1998 the court stayed the proceedings because the applicant had not paid the advance sum required. 18.  The applicant appealed against that decision. He maintained that, according to the established case-law of the Supreme Court (Sąd Najwyższy), a party’s failure to pay in advance costs of an expert opinion is not a sufficient ground for staying the proceedings. 19.  On 29 July 1998 the Regional Court dismissed the appeal. 20.  On 30 September 1999 the District Court resumed the proceedings and, on the same day, partly granted the applicant’s claim. 21.  On 12 September 2000 the Regional Court amended the first-instance judgment and partly granted the claim. Due to the value of the claim a cassation appeal was not available in this case.