6.  The applicant was born in 1934 and lived in Belgorod. 7.  The applicant received an old-age pension. The Law of 21 July 1997 on the Calculation and Upgrading of State Pensions (“the Pensions Act”) introduced, from 1 February 1998 onwards, a new method for calculating pensions. The idea behind this method, based on what is known as an “individual pensioner coefficient”, was to link the pension to the pensioner's previous earnings. 8.  The authority in charge of the applicant's pension, the Pension Fund Agency of Belgorod (“the Agency”), fixed the applicant's coefficient at 0.525. The applicant challenged the Agency's decision in the Sverdlovskiy District Court of Belgorod. She argued that her coefficient should be 0.7 from 1 February 1998. 9.  On 1 July 1999 the District Court found for the applicant, considering that the Agency had misinterpreted the Pensions Act. It decided that the Agency was to recalculate the applicant's pension using a coefficient of 0.7. 10.  The Agency appealed against the judgment. On 19 October 1999 the Belgorod Regional Court upheld the judgment, which became enforceable on the same day. The judgment was never executed. 11.  On 29 December 1999 the Ministry of Labour and Social Development (“the Ministry”) issued an Instruction on the “Application of Limitations” established by the Pensions Act (“the Instruction”). The Instruction clarified how to apply the Pensions Act. 12.  On 12 January 2000 a Deputy Prime Minister wrote a letter to the Prosecutor General. She complained that throughout the country courts had been deciding in pensioners' favour based on a manifestly wrong interpretation of the Pensions Act, and that the Pension Fund was unable to meet the unforeseen expenses. She asked the Prosecutor General to ask the Supreme Court to reconsider one such judgment to create a pilot case. 13.  Some time thereafter a group of individuals challenged the Instruction before the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. On 24 April 2000 the Supreme Court dismissed the complaint. It found that, contrary to what the complainants had suggested, the Ministry of Labour had not acted ultra vires in issuing the Instruction, and that the Ministry's interpretation of the Pensions Act had been correct. On 25 May 2000 the Cassation Division of the Supreme Court upheld this judgment on appeal. 14.  On 25 May 2000 the Agency lodged an application with the District Court for the reconsideration of the applicant's case owing to newly discovered circumstances on the basis of the Instruction, which supported their position. They argued that the Instruction had been upheld by the Supreme Court. 15.  On 14 September 2000 the District Court examined the Agency's request. The Agency maintained that the interpretation of the Pensions Act in the Instruction was a newly discovered circumstance which warranted the quashing of the judgment. The applicant submitted that the Agency had missed the statutory time-limit for requesting the reconsideration. 16.  The District Court held as follows:
“... the court considers that the application by the Pension Fund Agency of Belgorod is to be granted for the following reasons:
On 29 December 1999 the RF Ministry of Labour and Social Development issued an instruction on the application of the Federal Law on the Calculation and Upgrading of State Pensions. The lawfulness of the instruction was subject to examination by the RF Supreme Court ... which established its compliance with the provisions of the civil legislation.
... the Pension Fund Agency of Belgorod did not request the reconsideration of the judgment of 1 July 1999 until after the examination of the application [challenging the lawfulness of the Instruction] by the RF Supreme Court... Therefore the Agency had missed the statutory time-limit for requesting the reconsideration for good reason.
Taking into account the above-mentioned reasons the court considers that the judgment ... of 1 July 1999 is to be quashed owing to newly discovered circumstances.” 17.  In a decision of 14 September 2000 the District Court granted the Agency's application and quashed the judgment of 1 July 1999. 18.  As a result of the fresh examination of the case the District Court delivered a judgment of 14 September 2000 in which it rejected the applicant's claims in full. The applicant appealed against the judgment. On 31 October 2000 the Belgorod Regional Court dismissed the applicant's appeal and upheld the judgment of 14 September 2000. 19.  From 1 May 2001, following changes to the pension regulations, the applicant's pension was calculated based on a coefficient exceeding 0.7. According to the Government the coefficient was fixed at 0.84.