6.  The applicant was born in 1969 and lives in Niš, Serbia. 7.  The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 8.  On 23 May 1993 the applicant married N.C. and on 1 February 1994 their son O.C. was born. 9.  The applicant and N.C., at some point thereafter, started having marital problems. 10.  In August 1999 the applicant moved out, but O.C. apparently remained with N.C. 11.  In 2000 the applicant filed a claim with the Municipal Court (Opštinski sud) in Niš, seeking the dissolution of the marriage, the custody of O.C. and a contribution to his maintenance. 12.  On 7 October 2002 the Municipal Court: (i) dissolved the marriage; (ii) granted custody of O.C. to N.C.; (iii) ordered the applicant to pay monthly child maintenance; and (iv) ruled that the applicant could spend every first and third weekend of each month with O.C., as well as a part of his winter and summer holidays, respectively. This judgment became final on 18 November 2002. 13.  Having been refused access to O.C., on 5 February 2003 the applicant filed an enforcement request with the Municipal Court. 14.  On 10 February 2003 the Municipal Court issued an enforcement order. 15.  On 30 July 2003 the Municipal Court fined N.C. in the amount of 5,000 Serbian dinars (RSD) for failing to comply therewith. 16.  On 21 May 2003 the Social Care Centre (Centar za socijalni rad) in Niš modified the applicant's rights, granting her access to O.C. every other Saturday between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m. At the same time, however, it placed N.C. under formal supervision (nadzor nad vršenjem roditeljskog prava) for refusing to comply with the applicant's access rights. 17.  On 28 August 2003 this decision was confirmed on appeal. 18.  On 17 November 2003 the Municipal Court repealed its decisions of 10 February 2003 and 30 July 2003. 19.  On 5 April 2004 the Social Care Centre informed the Municipal Court of its decision adopted on 21 May 2003 and observed that, despite her keen interest, the applicant had only been able to see her child briefly at the centre's own premises. 20.  On 16 April 2004 the Municipal Court ordered the enforcement of the judgment rendered on 7 October 2002, as amended by the decision of the Social Care Centre of 21 May 2003. In so doing, it held that, should N.C. fail to respect the applicant's access rights, he would be fined in the amount of RSD 5,000 and, further, that forcible enforcement might itself ultimately be called for. 21.  On 28 October 2004 the Municipal Court confirmed its decision of 16 April 2004. 22.  Following N.C.'s two brief appearances before the Municipal Court on 23 September 2005 and 5 October 2006, on an unspecified date the court informed the applicant that her case file could not be found. 23.  On 13 March 2008 the applicant therefore requested the reconstruction of the case file and on 5 June 2008 the Municipal Court accepted this request. 24.  On 2 October 2008, however, the Municipal Court repealed its own decision, noting that the case file had been found in the meantime. Simultaneously, the court ordered the enforcement of the fine imposed previously and stated that a new fine in the amount of RSD 10,000 would be imposed should N.C. fail to comply with the order of 16 April 2004 within an additional period of three days. Lastly, the court stated that should repeated fines fail to secure the needed compliance, the applicant's access rights would have to be executed forcibly. 25.  On 2 December 2008 the Social Care Centre informed the Municipal Court that the applicant had had no contact with O.C. since September 2007, which is when N.C. and O.C. had moved from Niš to Belgrade without informing the applicant of their new address. 26.  On 30 April 2009 the police informed the Municipal Court that N.C. had registered his residence in Belgrade, and on 5 June 2009 they provided the court with his new address. 27.  On 4 June 2009 the applicant's case file was forwarded to the Fourth Municipal Court (Četvrti opstinski sud) in Belgrade. 28.  On 30 July 2009 the Fourth Municipal Court confirmed that N.C. had never moved to the address in question. 29.  On 1 October 2009 N.C. informed the Fourth Municipal Court about his current address in Belgrade. 30.  On the same date the Fourth Municipal Court ordered that the decision of 2 October 2008 be served on N.C. and carried out. 31.  Throughout the proceedings the applicant repeatedly complained about the domestic courts' inability to effectively enforce her access rights. 32.  On 25 July 2007 the Municipal Court in Niš terminated the employment of its bailiff in charge of the applicant's case, and on 20 May 2008 discovered the applicant's missing case file under his desk.