5.  The applicants were born in 1955, 1962 and 1958 respectively and live in Lebane (the first and the second applicant) and Ćenovac (the third applicant). 6.  On 11 March 2002 the Lebane Municipal Court (“the Municipal Court”), ordered “DP Metalna i elektro-industrija 1. Maj Ždeglovo” (“the debtor”), a company from Lebane, to pay the first and the second applicant each 46,399 Yugoslav dinars (YUM) and YUM 9,410 to the third applicant, in respect of the unpaid allowances, together with statutory interest until settlement. The debtor was also ordered to pay YUM 3,200 in solidum to all the plaintiffs (20 including the applicants) in respect of legal costs. The judgment became final on the same day. 7.   On 27 April 2002 the applicants filed a request for the enforcement of the above judgment. On 30 April 2002 the Municipal Court issued a writ of execution (rešenje o izvršenju). 8.  On 11 July 2003 the enforcement proceedings were discontinued in view of the debtor’s request for the opening of bankruptcy proceedings (paragraph 15 below). 9.  On 4 August 2006, following the applicants’ repeated requests, the enforcement proceedings were resumed. 10.  On 11 December 2006 the Municipal Court decided to discontinue the enforcement in respect of the second applicant as the debtor submitted evidence (signed written statement certified by the court) that she had withdrawn her claim because she had received compensation within the Redundant Employees Programme (Program rešavanja viška zaposlenih). The second applicant appealed against that decision and on 13 February 2007 the Leskovac District Court (“the District Court”) remitted the case to the Municipal Court instructing it to hold a hearing in order to clarify this matter. 11.  The Government claimed that the Municipal Court scheduled four hearings, on 4 June, 28 June and 9 July 2007 and on 8 October 2008, for which the applicants failed to appear. However, they did not submit the minutes from those hearings. At the subsequent hearing, held on 27 October 2008, the Municipal Court ordered a financial examination of the outstanding judgment debt in respect of the first and the third applicant. On 30 January 2009 the financial expert submitted his opinion. At the subsequent hearing, held on 23 March 2009, the Municipal Court rejected the first and the third applicant’s objections on the financial expert’s findings. 12.  On 24 March 2009 the Municipal Court discontinued the enforcement proceedings in respect of the second applicant and ordered the enforcement in respect of the first and the third applicant based on the expert’s findings. 13.  On 31 March 2009 the first and the third applicant appealed against that decision, in particular regarding the expert’s findings. The second applicant did not appeal. On 17 July 2009 the District Court upheld the decision of 24 March 2009. 14.  On 24 March 2010 the outstanding judgment debt was paid to the first and the third applicant. 15. On 26 March 2002 the debtor submitted a request for the opening of bankruptcy proceedings. On 24 October 2003 the Leskovac Commercial Court rejected that request. On 15 January 2004 the High Commercial Court upheld that decision. 16.  On 17 July 2007 the debtor was privatised. 17.  The sales contract was annulled on 30 October 2008. As of that date, the debtor still consisted of predominantly socially/State-owned capital. 18.  On 30 April 2010 the Leskovac Commercial Court initiated bankruptcy proceedings. It appears that they are still pending.