5.  The applicants were born in 1935, 1936, 1949 and 1949 respectively and live in Budapest. 6.  The applicants, two married couples, were parties to a 1996 sale and purchase agreement concerning a flat. One of the applicants on the sellers’ side was registered in the land register only as the holder of an annotation rather than proprietor. Moreover, her predecessor (“the Predecessor”) was in the same situation, and it was the person who had sold the flat to the Predecessor in 1993 that was registered as the owner (“the Owner”). Because in 2000 the Predecessor had not been able to obtain from the Owner an authorisation to have himself registered as proprietor, neither his nor the applicants’ requests to have the ensuing transactions registered were granted by the District Land Registry. 7.  The applicants lodged an appeal with the Budapest Land Registry. They complained that, had they been informed of the procedure concerning the Predecessor and the Owner, they would have been able to obtain the necessary authorisation themselves, thereby enabling the registration of the chain of transactions. 8.  Although the missing authorisation had meanwhile been obtained and in fact submitted, the Land Registry dismissed the appeal. On 9 December 2005 the Budapest Regional Court dismissed the applicants’ request for judicial review. It relied on leading judgments of the Supreme Court, whose text was available only to the respondent Land Registry (which had also been respondent in the earlier procedures) but not to the applicants. In sum, the applicants’ ownership was not registered at that stage. 9.  In pursuit of the applicants’ petition for review, on 9 May 2006 the Supreme Court ordered that review proceedings concerning the merits of the case be instituted. 10.  On 15 November 2006 the Supreme Court’s review bench dismissed the applicants’ petition. This decision was served on their lawyer on 11 December 2006. 11.  The applicants subsequently submitted a request, under sections 86-88 of Act no. 141 of 1997 (the chapter concerning properties with an unresolved status in the land register), to have the situation of the property in question regularised in the land register. 12.  The applicants’ request was granted and the transaction eventually registered on 13 June 2008.