8.  On 12 January 1996 the applicant had an accident while driving a car belonging to his employer. The police found alcohol on the applicant’s breath and seized his driving licence. 9.  On 17 January 1996 the police department in Košice decided not to restore the driving licence to the applicant pending the outcome of the investigation into the accident. On 1 February 1996 the applicant appealed. 10.  On 5 March 1996 the Ministry of the Interior upheld the first instance decision. 11.  On 17 May 1996 the applicant sought a judicial review of the administrative decisions to withhold his driving licence. 12.  On 30 June 1997 the Bratislava III District Court dismissed the action. It noted that the administrative decisions in question were of a procedural nature and that it lacked jurisdiction to review them. 13.  On 19 December 1997 the applicant lodged a petition with the Constitutional Court. He alleged a violation of his constitutional right to a hearing without undue delays in the proceedings concerning the decision to withhold his driving licence. He also alleged a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in that the proceedings before the Bratislava III District Court had been unfair. 14.  On 11 February 1998 the Constitutional Court rejected the complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention as it found no reason for applying an international treaty in the applicant’s case. It declared admissible the complaint about the length of the proceedings. On 31 March 1998 the Constitutional Court found that the applicant’s constitutional right to a hearing without undue delays had been violated in the proceedings before the Bratislava III District Court. 15.  On 12 April 1996 the Košice 1 District Prosecutor indicted the applicant for two offences on the ground that on 17 December 1995 and on 12 January 1996 respectively he had driven a car after having drunk alcohol and that on the latter date he had caused a road accident. 16.  On 30 April 1996 the Košice 1 District Court issued a penal order convicting the applicant on two counts of causing danger to other persons while being intoxicated and imposed a conditional six months’ prison sentence. The applicant was further disqualified from driving for two and a half years. 17.  On 15 May 1996 the applicant challenged the penal order. 18.  Hearings before the Košice 1 District Court were held on 11 June 1996, on 26 November 1996 and on 17 December 1996. On the latter date the Košice 1 District Court delivered a judgment the operative part of which was the same, in substantive terms, as that of the penal order. 19.  On 7 February 1997 the applicant appealed. 20.  On 23 April 1997 the Supreme Court transferred the case from the Košice Regional Court to the Žilina Regional Court. 21.  On 16 July 1997 the latter quashed the first instance judgment with reference to several shortcomings in the proceedings before the trial court. The decision was to be served by the Košice 1 District Court. The latter received it on 28 July 1997. 22.  On 25 March 1998 the applicant complained to the President of the Košice 1 District Court that he had not been notified of the appellate court’s decision. On 16 April 1998 the President of the Košice 1 District apologised to the applicant for delays in the proceedings. 23.  On 4 May 1998 the applicant complained to the President of the Košice Regional Court that the decision on his appeal had not been served and that the proceedings had lasted an unreasonably long time. 24.  On 12 May 1998 the applicant complained to the Constitutional Court about delays in the proceedings. 25.  On 17 December 1998 the Constitutional Court found that the Košice 1 District Court was responsible for undue delays in the proceedings. 26.  In December 1998 and on 13 January 1999 the Košice 1 District Court held hearings in the case. 27.  On 12 January 2000 the Košice 1 District Court convicted the applicant on two counts of causing danger to other persons while being intoxicated and imposed a combined sentence: the applicant was fined 5,000 Slovakian korunas and disqualified from driving for five years. 28.  On 28 February 2000 the applicant appealed. The applicant’s brother and son respectively also filed an appeal. 29.  On 28 June 2000 the Žilina Regional Court dismissed the appeals. 30.  On 22 August 2000 the Košice 1 District Court decided that the five years’ prohibition to drive motor vehicles imposed in the criminal proceedings was to be counted as from 12 January 1996 when the applicant’s driving licence had been withheld by an administrative measure.