5.  In 1996 the applicant company GRUPA ZASTAVA VOZILA A.D. concluded a contract with the company PS ZA AVTO p.o. before a notary determining the contractual modalities concerning joint investments. 6.  On 1 December 1997 proceedings for the annulment of the above contract and notarial protocol were instituted against the applicant company before the Ljubljana District Court by the company PS ZA AVTO. 7.  On 14 July 1998 the court ordered the claim to be served on the applicant company in the Republic of Serbia with the assistance of the Ministry of Justice (“the Ministry”) through diplomatic channels. 8.  On 29 October 1998 the court made an inquiry with the Ministry concerning the service. 9.  On 12 November 1998 the Ministry informed the court that they were still waiting for a reply from the Serbian authorities. 10.  On 30 May 2000 the court received a request for third party intervention from the company ZASTAVA AVTO d.o.o. 11.  On 6 June 2000 the court made another inquiry with the Ministry concerning the service. 12.  On 29 June 2000 the applicant company’s representative sent the authority form and a request for joinder with another case. 13.  On 17 May 2001 the applicant company sent a request for a hearing to be set. 14.  The first hearing scheduled for 11 October 2001 was postponed. 15.  On 12 October 2001 the State Attorney’s Office submitted a request for third party intervention. 16.  On 10 June 2002 the court issued a decision allowing both third parties to participate in the proceedings. 17.  On 12 September 2002 the applicant company lodged a counterclaim. Due to the counterclaim the court postponed the hearing set for 19 September 2002. 18.  On 3 February 2003 the court held a settlement hearing. The parties failed to reach a settlement. 19.  On 14 April 2003 the court held the first hearing. 20.  On 23 April 2003 the applicant company requested an extension of deadline for the submission of documents. The deadline was extended by one month. 21.  On 10 November 2003 the court appointed a financial expert. 22.  On 23 February 2004 the court granted the expert’s request for the extension of the deadline for the submission of the report. 23.  On 3 May 2004 the expert submitted the report. 24.  On 6 October 2004 the court held a hearing. 25.  On 13 December 2004 the court rendered a judgment ruling in favour of the applicant company. The notarial protocol and the contract remained in force. The plaintiff appealed. 26.  On 7 November 2006 the Ljubljana Higher Court delivered a judgment amending the first-instance judgment and ruling against the applicant company. The applicant company lodged an appeal on points of law. 27.  On 12 May 2008 the Supreme Court delivered a judgment upholding the appeal court’s decision. The applicant company lodged a constitutional appeal. 28.  On 13 May 2010 the Constitutional Court rejected the appeal as unfounded.