5.  The applicant was born in 1951 and lives in the town of Dudinka in the Taymyr (Dolgano-Nenetskiy) Autonomous District in the Krasnoyarsk Region. 6.  On 4 June 1997 the Dudinka Town Court reinstated the applicant in his position as the head of a permanent commission of the Taymyr District Legislative Assembly and awarded him wage arrears and compensation for non-pecuniary damage. That judgment was upheld on appeal and became final on 5 November 1997. 7.  Enforcement proceedings were instituted, but on 16 December 1997 a deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation, Mr Davydov, suspended the enforcement proceedings and notified the Dudinka Town Court of his decision. 8.  On 20 September 2001 the applicant lodged an action with the Tverskoy District Court of Moscow against the deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation. He argued that the decision to suspend the enforcement proceedings had been unlawful. He also sought compensation for non-pecuniary damage. 9.  On 20 November 2001 the Tverskoy District Court held a hearing. Both the applicant and his representative were present. The hearing was adjourned until 13 December 2001. 10.  The applicant’s representative attended the hearing on 13 December 2001. At the same hearing the Tverskoy District Court pronounced judgment, dismissing the applicant’s claims. 11.  The applicant’s representative appealed against the judgment to the Moscow City Court. He complained that the judgment was unfair and that the District Court had not given the applicant’s arguments due consideration. 12.  According to the Government, on 13 March 2002 the Moscow City Court sent a letter to the applicant notifying him that an appeal hearing had been listed for 10 April 2002. The Government provided the Court with a copy of that letter. The letter was not signed and bore a handwritten note indicating that it had been sent on “13 March 2001”. According to the applicant, neither he nor his representative was informed about the hearing of 10 April 2002. 13.  On 24 April 2002 the Moscow City Court, in the presence of the representative of the Prosecutor General’s office, upheld the judgment of 13 December 2001. According to the applicant, he and his representative were not summonsed to the hearing of 24 April 2002. They learned about it in May 2002 when they received the judgment of 24 April 2002.