4.  The applicant was born in 1957 and lives in Budapest. 5.  On 26 July 1991 the applicant brought an action against an insurance company seeking compensation for injuries she had suffered in a road traffic accident. The dispute essentially concerned the amount of compensation payable. 6.  After having obtained two expert opinions and held numerous hearings, on 5 November 1997 the Budapest Regional Court gave judgment. On 9 March 2000 the Supreme Court quashed this decision. 7.  In the resumed proceedings, on 5 February 2002 the Budapest Regional Court awarded the applicant 8.2 million Hungarian forints (HUF) in compensation in addition to a monthly allowance. 8.  On 28 April 2004 the Supreme Court’s appellate bench amended this decision, reducing the award. This judgment was final and served on 28 June 2004. 9.  On 14 September 2004 the Supreme Court rejected the applicant’s request for rectification of the judgment holding that her allegations related to the assessment of facts rather than any clerical error. 10.  In a preliminary examination under section 273 of the Code of Civil Procedure, on 1 October 2004 the Supreme Court’s review bench refused to deal with the merits of the applicant’s petition for review. In essence, it relied on section 270 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as in force during the relevant period, according to which a review of the substantive unlawfulness of final decisions was only admissible if a review was considered necessary from the perspective of harmonising or developing the application of the law. This decision was served on 3 November 2004. 11.  In 2005 the applicant filed another action, introducing further compensation claims. On 31 May 2007 the Budapest Regional Court awarded her HUF 19.6 million. The Budapest Court of Appeal upheld this judgment. Its decision was served on the applicant on 21 February 2008.