5.  The applicant was born in 1922 and lives in Bonn. 6.  On 17 April 1989 the applicant brought civil proceedings before the Wiesbaden Regional Court against the former tenant of his business premises, claiming, inter alia, payment of outstanding rent. Until October 1989 he extended or amended the action four times. 7.  After an oral hearing on 11 October 1989 the Regional Court partly found for the applicant on 29 November 1989 by way of a default judgment (Versäumnis-Teilurteil). 8.  On 21 February 1990 the applicant again extended his claim. By final judgment of 28 March 1990 (Schlussurteil) the Regional Court partly found for the applicant and dismissed his remaining claims. On 23 July 1990 the judgment was served on the applicant. 9.  Both parties appealed against the judgment. On 24 September 1990 the applicant submitted his grounds of appeal and again extended his action. Upon his requests he was granted two further extensions of time-limits of one month respectively. On 29 April 1991 the applicant again extended his claims. 10.  On 18 March 1992, after an oral hearing on 26 February 1992, the Frankfurt a.M. Court of Appeal commissioned two expert reports which were delivered on 10 February 1993 and on 9 June 1993. After an extension of the time-limit of one week the applicant on 6 October 1993 submitted objections to one of the reports. 11.  On 13 April 1994 the Court of Appeal gave a partial judgment on provisional enforceability. 12.  On 4 October 1994 the Court of Appeal commissioned a further expert report which was delivered on 24 February 1996, after the court had enquired about the report five times. After an extension of the time-limit of two weeks the applicant submitted objections to the report. 13.  On 26 March 1997 the Court of Appeal held an oral hearing, heard one expert and the applicant lodged an auxiliary request. On 25 June 1997 the Court of Appeal partly quashed the Regional Court’s judgment. 14.  On 7 August 1997 the applicant lodged an appeal on points of law. Upon his request he was granted an extension of three months of the time-limit for submitting his grounds of appeal. 15.  On 9 February 2000 the Federal Court of Justice partly quashed the judgment of the Court of Appeal and insofar remitted the case. 16.  On 24 January 2001 the Court of Appeal held an oral hearing and on 21 March 2001 gave its judgment. In April 2001 the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint against the judgment. 17.  On 15 January 2003 the Hessen Constitutional Court quashed the Court of Appeal’s judgment and remitted the case, finding that the applicant’s right to be heard had been violated. 18.  On 7 May 2003 the Court of Appeal held an oral hearing and heard an expert. On 28 May 2003 it commissioned a supplemental expert report and ordered the applicant to pay advance costs of EUR 2,000 for the expert. On 13 June 2003 the applicant objected to the amount. On 16 June 2003 and 7 July 2003 the Court of Appeal enquired about the payment of the costs. 19.  After having been informed by the defendant in September 2003 that the parties were negotiating on a settlement of the dispute, the Court of Appeal until May 2004 enquired four times about the state of affairs but received no answers. 20.  Between June 2004 and June 2005 the applicant submitted several appeals against cost orders. 21.  Between February 2005 and October 2005 the applicant submitted three motions for bias, all of which were dismissed. 22.  On 21 September 2005 the Court of Appeal held an oral hearing and on 26 October 2005 it issued an order for the taking of evidence. 23.  On 18 January 2006 another hearing was held. On 8 February 2006 the Court of Appeal issued a judgment by consent (Anerkenntnisurteil) and decided on the value in dispute and the distribution of the costs of the entire proceedings (Kostengrundentscheidung). 24.  On 23 February 2006 the applicant submitted a motion for the right to be heard (Anhörungsrüge), a motion for reconsideration (Gegenvorstellung) and a fourth motion for bias. On 22 March 2006 the Court of Appeal rejected the motion for bias. On 10 April 2006 the applicant submitted a motion for the right to be heard against this decision and a fifth motion for bias. On 20 April 2006 the applicant submitted a revised and supplemented version of his submissions of 10 April 2006, which he supplemented again on 24 and 29 April 2006. On 15 May 2006 the last motion for bias was dismissed as abusive. On 2 June 2006 the applicant submitted a motion for the right to be heard against the decision of 15 May 2006. On 7 June 2006 the Court of Appeal held a hearing at which the parties did not appear. On 14 June 2006 the Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s motions of 23 February 2006. On 7 July 2006 the applicant submitted a motion for the right to be heard against the decision of 14 June 2006 and a sixth motion for bias. The latter was dismissed as inadmissible on 12 July 2006. 25.  On 4 September 2006 the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint with the Hessen Constitutional Court in which he mainly complained about the distribution of the costs of the proceedings. 26.  On 14 March 2007 the Hessen Constitutional Court ordered the applicant to pay an advance on court fees amounting to EUR 750 and informed him that it had doubts as to the admissibility of his constitutional complaint. On 21 March 2007 that decision was served on the applicant.