4.  The applicant was born in 1977 and lives in Rivne. 5.  On 10 July 1998 M.B., a private person, lodged a claim with the Rivne Court requesting a contract by which a flat had been sold to him by the applicant and her husband to be declared valid. 6.  In November 1998 the applicant lodged a counter-claim seeking the eviction of M.B. and M.A. from the flat. 7.  On 3 December 1998 the Rivne Court allowed the M.B.’s claims. It found the applicant’s counter-claim unsubstantiated and dismissed them. 8.  On 15 March 1999 the Rivne Regional Court quashed the judgment of 3 December 1998 and remitted the case for fresh consideration finding that the first-instance court had failed to examine all the aspects of the case. 9.  On 22 December 2004 the Rivne Court, hearing the case in the presence of the applicant and her lawyer, allowed the claims of M.B. and rejected the applicant’s counter-claim. It found that the applicant and her son had moved from the disputed flat in May 1998 to live with her parents and she had voluntarily transferred the flat to M.B., though subsequently she refused to have the contract certified by a notary due to a disagreement with her husband. 10.  On 17 January 2005 the applicant and her lawyer appealed against the judgment of 22 December 2004. 11.  On 27 April 2005 the Rivne Regional Court of Appeal heard the case in the presence of the applicant. The applicant requested the court to postpone the examination of her case as her lawyer could not participate in that hearing. The court rejected her request, dismissed the applicant’s appeal and upheld the judgment of 22 December 2004. 12.  On 15 August 2005 the Supreme Court rejected the applicant’s appeal in cassation. 13.  In the course of the proceedings the first-instance court scheduled thirty-one hearings, out of which two were not held because of the applicant’s failure to attend, one was adjourned for nine days to allow the applicant to study the case-file and one was adjourned for twenty-three days on the applicant’s request. Nineteen hearings were not held because of the other parties’ failure to appear or on their request for adjournment of the hearings. Between May 2000 and December 2002 there were five hearings scheduled, of which one was held. In 2003 there were six hearings scheduled and one held.