4.  The applicant was born in 1951 and lives in the city of L’viv, Ukraine. 5.  On 19 April 1999 the Shevchenkivsky District Administration of the L’viv City Council appointed the applicant as tutor of her disabled sister, P. 6.  On 6 October 1999 the applicant instituted proceedings in the Shevchenkivsky District Court of L’viv [Шевченківський районний суд м. Львова] against M., seeking rescission of a purchase contract of an apartment, concluded between him and P. Subsequently it was established that the apartment in question had been resold to G. and the latter, accordingly, was joined to the proceedings as a co-defendant. 7.  On 1 November 1999 the court ordered the forensic psychiatric examination of P. It also ordered attachment of the disputed apartment. 8.  On 21 April 2000 the expert report was submitted. According to this report, when concluding the above contract P. lacked legal capacity to act. 9.  On 17 October 2000 the court ordered an additional forensic psychiatric examination. 10.  On 18 December 2000 the second expert report confirmed the conclusions of the first examination. 11.  On 5 April 2001 the court ordered a repeated forensic psychiatric examination. The applicant appealed against this ruling. 12.  On 7 May 2001 the L’viv Regional Court upheld the ruling in question. In particular, it pointed out that ordering another expert examination was necessary in so far as the previous ones were not comprehensive. 13.  On 9 July 2001 the third expert reached the same conclusions as the previous ones. 14.  On 23 November 2001 the court ordered an expertise of the apartment’s value. 15.  On 26 December 2001 the expert report was submitted. According to this report, the disputed apartment cost 17,478[1] Ukrainian hryvnas (UAH). 16.  On 4 January 2002 the Shevchenkivsky District Court of L’viv allowed the applicant’s claim, invalidated the contracts at issue and awarded G. compensation in the amount of the apartment’s value. The applicant appealed. 17.  On 25 March 2002 the L’viv Regional Court of Appeal [Апеляційний суд Львівської області] (hereinafter “the Court of Appeal”) upheld the judgment of the first instance court. The applicant appealed in cassation. 18.  On 12 November 2003 the Supreme Court of Ukraine, pointing out a number of the lower courts’ shortcomings, quashed the judgment of 4 January 2002 and the decision of 25 March 2002, and remitted the case for a fresh consideration to the first instance court. 19.  On 26 May 2004 the Lychakivsky District Court of L’viv [Личаківський районний суд м. Львова] (hereinafter “the District Court”), to which the case was transferred, allowed the applicant’s claim in part, invalidated the contracts at issue and awarded UAH 4,000[2] to be paid to M. by the applicant, and the same amount to be paid to G. by M. 20.  On 4 October 2004 the Court of Appeal quashed this judgment and remitted the case for a fresh consideration. It found, in particular, that such category of cases as the instant one should have been examined by a panel of judges whereas the impugned judgment had been rendered by a single judge. 21.  On 26 September 2005 the District Court allowed the applicant’s claim, invalidated the contracts in question and awarded UAH 4,000 to be paid to M. by the applicant, and the same amount to be paid to G. by M. 22.  On 6 October 2005 G. lodged an appeal against this judgment. 23.  On 12 January 2006 the case-file was sent to the Court of Appeal. 24.  On 3 April 2006 the Court of Appeal revealed a number of procedural shortcomings of the inferior court, namely the failure to comply with its instructions as to the examination by a panel of judges (see paragraph 20 above), to follow instructions of the Supreme Court of Ukraine given in its decision of 12 November 2003 (see paragraph 18 above), and to summon the defendants in a proper way. Accordingly, it quashed the judgment of 26 September 2005 and remitted the case for a fresh consideration. The applicant appealed in cassation. 25.  On 8 August 2006 the Supreme Court of Ukraine rejected the applicant’s request for leave to appeal in cassation against the ruling of 3 April 2006. 26.  On 25 June 2007 the District Court found in part for the applicant. In particular, it invalidated the purchase contract between P. and M., and ordered the latter to pay UAH 17,478 to the applicant. With regard to the purchase contract concluded between M. and G., the court found the latter to be a bona fide purchaser, and therefore this contract was valid. The applicant appealed. 27.  On 8 November 2007 the Court of Appeal quashed this judgment in the part related to the compensation owed to the applicant by M., and rejected this claim. It upheld the remainder of the lower court’s findings. 28.  The applicant appealed in cassation and the proceedings are still pending before the Supreme Court of Ukraine. 29.  Meanwhile, on 3 December 2007 the District Court lifted the attachment order of 1 November 1999 (see paragraph 7 above). On 14 April 2008 the Court of Appeal upheld this decision.