5.  The applicant was born in 1956 and lives in Ravne na Koroškem. 6.  On 10 May 1995 the applicant was grievously injured in a car accident. She was unconscious for ten days and remained in hospital for two and a half months. Although she and her husband were separated at the time and were going through a divorce, he was also in the car and sustained some injuries. 7.  On 6 June 1995 the police filed a criminal complaint against the applicant with the Slovenj Gradec District Prosecutor’s Office, alleging that she had caused the accident by negligent driving.
On 17 May 1996 the Slovenj Gradec District Prosecutor lodged a bill of indictment against the applicant, in the Slovenj Gradec Local Court (Okrajno sodišče v Slovenj Gradcu), for causing a traffic accident by negligence.
In November 1996 the summons to the first hearing scheduled for 3 December 1996 was served on the applicant.
On 3 December 1996 the court held a hearing and heard testimony from the applicant’s husband. He gave a detailed description of how the accident had occurred, even though he had lost consciousness for a while at the time of the accident.
The court found the applicant guilty and issued her with a warning (sodni opomin). 8.  On 24 December 1996 the applicant appealed to the Maribor Higher Court (Višje sodišče v Mariboru).
On 27 December 1996 and 12 March 1997 the applicant supplemented her appeal by adducing additional evidence.
On 9 April 1997 the Maribor Higher Court allowed the applicant’s appeal, annulled the first-instance court’s judgment and remitted the case for new fact-finding. 9.  The hearings held on 25 September 1997 and 22 January 1998 were adjourned, but not at the request of the applicant. In this period the applicant lodged three written submissions.
During the proceedings, the court appointed a medical expert. The court also sought an additional opinion from the appointed expert.
The court heard six witnesses, including the applicant’s former husband. He acknowledged that he had not been telling the truth when he first gave testimony in court. He explained that on the morning of the accident he had sneaked into the boot of the car to follow his wife. Consequently, he was neither driving the car nor was he able to see out of the boot.
At the last hearing the court found the applicant guilty and issued her with a warning. 10.  On 12 February 1998 the applicant appealed to the Maribor Higher Court.
On 27 January 1999 the court allowed the applicant’s appeal, annulled the first-instance court’s judgment and remitted the case for new fact-finding. 11.  On 16 May 2001 the applicant requested the court to terminate the proceedings because the criminal prosecution had become time-barred and sought reimbursement of the costs and expenses she had incurred in the proceedings.
On 24 May 2001 the court rejected the bill of indictment because it was time-barred. The criminal proceedings were thus discontinued.
The decision was served on the applicant on 30 May 2001.
On 19 June 2001 the applicant again requested the court to give a decision on the costs and expenses incurred in the proceedings.
On 4 July 2001 the court delivered the decision in question. 12.  On 11 July 2001 the applicant appealed.
On 8 October 2001 a chamber of the Slovenj Gradec District Court (Okrožno sodišče v Slovenj Gradcu) allowed the applicant’s appeal in part and increased the award of costs and expenses.
The decision was served on the applicant on 9 October 2001.