5.  The applicant was born in 1943 and resides in the town of Novogrodovka, Donetsk region, Ukraine. 6.  The applicant instituted two sets of proceedings in the Novogrodovskiy Town Court of Donetsk Region against the Novogrodovskaya Mining Company No. 1/3 - a State-owned enterprise - to recover salary arrears and other payments due to him. 7.  On 22 February and 8 May 2002 the Novogrodovskiy Town Court found in favour of the applicant (Решения Новогродовского городского суда Донецкой области) and awarded him UAH 8,103.20[1] and UAH 3,128.40[2] respectively. These judgments were sent for enforcement to the Novogrodovskiy Town Bailiffs’ Service (Отдел Государственной исполнительной службы Новогродовского городского управления юстиции). 8.  In July 2002, the applicant instituted proceedings in the Novogrodovskiy Town Court of the Donetsk Region against the Novogrodovskiy Town Bailiffs’ Service for failure to enforce the judgment of 22 February 2002 in his favour. On 25 July 2002 the Town Court rejected the applicant’s claim, finding no fault had been committed by the Bailiffs’ Service. The court stated that the Bailiffs’ Service had acted properly in enforcing the judgment of 22 February 2002. However, by a number of decisions of the Commercial Court of the Donetsk Region, the Bailiffs’ Service had been prohibited from selling the property of the Mining Company, due to the bankruptcy proceedings which had been initiated against the company. On 2 September 2002 the Court of Appeal of the Donetsk Region upheld the judgment of 25 July 2002. On 29 January 2003 the Supreme Court of Ukraine rejected the applicant’s appeal in cassation. 9.  In September 2002, the applicant instituted another set of proceedings in the Novogrodovskiy Town Court of the Donetsk Region against the Novogrodovskiy Town Bailiffs’ Service for failure to enforce the judgment of 8 May 2002 in his favour. On 10 October 2002 the Town Court rejected the applicant’s claim, for the same reasons as before. On 16 December 2002 the Court of Appeal of the Donetsk Region upheld the judgment of 10 October 2002. On 7 October 2003 the Supreme Court of Ukraine rejected the applicant’s appeal in cassation. 10.  In February 2003 the Novogrodovskaya Mining Company was reorganised and became a structural subdivision of the Selidovugol Mining Company. As the latter thereby became the debtor, the enforcement proceedings were transferred to the Selidovskiy Town Bailiffs’ Service (Отдел Государственной исполнительной службы Селидовского городского управления юстиции). 11.  The applicant instituted proceedings in the Selidovskiy Town Court of the Donetsk region against the Selidovskiy Town Bailiffs’ Service claiming compensation for material and moral damage inflicted to him by the non-enforcement of the judgments in his favour. On 22 November 2004 the court decided on the case but the parties did not inform the Court about the outcome of the proceedings. On 24 January 2005 the court provided the applicant with a time-limit until 15 February 2005 to submit his appeal against this judgment in compliance with procedural formalities. 12.  By letter of 4 January 2005 the applicant informed the court that on 7 December 2004 the judgments in his favour were enforced in full.