5.  The applicant was born in 1981 and lives in Dolný Kubín. 6.  On 5 February 2004 the police arrested the applicant. He was accused of planning a robbery[1] and remanded in custody from that date. 7.  Several decisions extending the applicant’s detention were made. In particular, on 18 November 2004 the Žilina District Court extended his detention in the context of the preliminary proceedings until 24 January 2005. 8.  On 21 January 2005 the public prosecutor indicted the applicant and several other persons before the Žilina Regional Court. 9.  The applicant requested to be released, arguing that the Regional Court had not extended his detention after the expiry of the period indicated in the District Court’s decision of 18 November 2004. 10.  On 20 April 2005 the Regional Court ordered the applicant’s release. Upon a complaint lodged by the public prosecutor the Supreme Court decided on 24 May 2005 that the applicant should remain remanded in custody. 11.  On 27 July 2005 the applicant complained to the Constitutional Court that his detention in the period after 24 January 2005 was unlawful. 12.  On 5 February 2006 the applicant was released. 13.  On 15 February 2006 the Constitutional Court found that by the above decision of 24 May 2005 the Supreme Court had breached the applicant’s right under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention (judgment I.ÚS 204/05). There had been no judicial decision extending the applicant’s detention after 24 January 2005 and there existed no justification for that situation. 14.  The Constitutional Court ordered the Supreme Court to reimburse the applicant’s costs in the constitutional proceedings. It dismissed the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction, holding that (i) the finding of a violation of Article 5 § 1 provided appropriate redress for the applicant and (ii) the Supreme Court’s decision of 24 May 2005 was based on that court’s practice which, however, was not in accordance with practice under the Convention.