5.  The applicant was born in 1948 and lives in Istanbul. 6.  The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. 7.  On 24 August 2000 the applicant instituted compensation proceedings before the Eskişehir Administrative Court claiming that she had contracted (HEPATIT-C) from the surgical instruments used during her operation. 8.  On 6 November 2001 the Eskişehir Administrative Court found the applicant’s objection groundless and refused her request for compensation. 9.   On 21 December 2001 the applicant appealed against the judgment of 6 November 2001. 10.  On 30 January 2004 the Supreme Administrative Court upheld the first instance court’s judgment. 11.  On 1 August 2004 the applicant requested rectification of the Supreme Administrative Court’s decision. 12.  On 17 August 2004 the Eskişehir Administrative Court issued an interim decision and noted that the fee for rectification had not been paid. The court asked the applicant to correct this procedural shortcoming within fifteen days. 13.  On 7 October 2004, upon her non-compliance with the interim decision of the court, the court decided not to put the applicant’s rectification request into action. 14.  On 1 November 2004 the applicant appealed. 15.  On 11 May 2006 the Supreme Administrative Court quashed the administrative court’s decision not to take the applicant’s request for rectification into account finding that the request had been properly submitted. Yet, the Supreme Court dismissed the request upon an examination of merits holding that there was no plausible ground requiring rectification. 16.  On 28 August 2006 the applicant was notified of the decision of 11 May 2006.