4.  The applicant was born in 1956 and lives in Kecskemét, Hungary. 5.  The applicant was dismissed from his employment. On 28 August 1995 the applicant brought an action before the Budapest Labour Court claiming severance pay. On 15 November 1995 the Labour Court held a hearing. On that occasion the applicant modified his action and also requested that his dismissal be annulled. 6.  On 6 February 1996 the Labour Court dismissed the applicant's request to be reinstated in his employment, holding that his claim in this connection had been submitted outside the statutory time-limit. 7.  On 19 June 1996 the Budapest Regional Court, sitting as a second instance, dismissed the applicant's appeal against the partial decision of 6 February 1996. On 12 November 1996 the Supreme Court dismissed his petition for review. 8.  As regards the remainder of the action, the Budapest Labour Court held further hearings on 27 May and 1 July 1998. On the latter date it awarded the applicant in the region of 130,000 Hungarian forints plus accrued interest by way of severance pay and outstanding wages. 9.  On appeal, the Budapest Regional Court held hearings on 15 January, 14 April and 23 June 1999. 10.  On 2 July 1999 the Regional Court increased the award in a partial judgment. On 2 September 1999 the applicant filed a petition for review with the Supreme Court. On 7 October 1999 the Supreme Court ordered that the petition be completed. On 25 February 2000 it appointed a legal-aid lawyer for the applicant. 
On 3 January 2001 the Supreme Court dismissed, in a partial decision, the applicant's petition for review. This decision was served on the applicant on 7 February 2001. 11.  Meanwhile, on 22 September 1999 the Regional Court suspended the proceedings conducted in respect of some claims still outstanding, pending the review proceedings. 12.  Subsequent to the decision of 3 January 2001, the Regional Court resumed the proceedings. A hearing scheduled for June 2001 was adjourned as the notification sent to the applicant had been returned to the court undelivered. The Regional Court's further enquiry about the applicant's address was unsuccessful. Consequently, on 12 September 2001 the court suspended the proceedings. On 12 March 2002 the proceedings were discontinued, pursuant to section 137 § 1 (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure, as a six months' period had elapsed from the date of the order suspending the case.