4.  The applicant was born in 1968 and lives in Irkutsk. 5.  In 1989 the applicant's husband received a fatal work-related injury. In 1990 the applicant was granted compensation by her husband's former employer, a private company (“the company”). 6.  On 10 March 1997 the applicant brought court proceedings against the company, following numerous re-calculations of the amount to be paid and regular failures of the company to effectuate the payments. In particular, she sought compensation of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, penalties for the belated payments and indexation of such payments and re-calculation of monthly payments with subsequent indexation. 7.  On 11 February 1998 the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Irkutsk (“the District Court”) granted the applicant's claims in part. The judgment was set aside on appeal on 26 June 1998 by the Irkutsk Regional Court (“the Regional Court”) which required a new hearing of the case. The appeal court also issued a special statement reprimanding the judge in charge of the applicant's case for erroneous application of the law that resulted in the quashing of the judgment and delays in the proceedings. 8.  Once back at the trial court, the case was assigned to judge V., and on 7 December 1998 it was transferred for unspecified reasons to judge T. 9.  On 16 December 1998 the hearing did not take place as the respondent failed to appear. 10.  On 24 March 1999 the hearing again did not take place due to the judge's illness. 11.  On 13 August 1999 the respondent's representative requested to adjourn the proceedings as he was ill. The proceedings were adjourned to 18 October 1999 with account of the judge's vacation. The parties were requested to provide some additional evidence. 12.  On 18 October 1999 the proceedings again were adjourned at the respondent's representative's request. The respondent was notified that in the event of a default in appearance on 30 November 1999 the case would be examined in its absence. 13.  On 30 November 1999 the court invited the applicant to provide some additional evidence and adjourned the hearing to 7 February 2000. 14.  On 7 February 2000 at the applicant's request the hearing was adjourned to 21 April 2000. On the latter date the hearing did not take place as the judge was away for training. 15.  The hearing of 7 June 2000 did not take place due to the judge's illness. 16.  On 28 October 2000 the case was transmitted back to judge V. 17.  On 27 December 2000 the hearing was adjourned to 14 February 2001 at the respondent's representative's request. 18.  On 22 February 2001 the applicant submitted the amended claims and calculations. 19.  On 27 June 2001 the hearing was adjourned as the respondent's representative requested the court to obtain certain evidence. 20.  From 31 July to 10 December 2001 no hearings were scheduled due to the judge's illness and subsequent vacation. 21.  On 25 January 2002 the hearing did not take place as the applicant's representative failed to appear. 22.  The hearing of 4 March 2002 was adjourned on account of a need to obtain certain evidence. 23.  On 10 April 2002 the case was transferred to judge P., again for unspecified reasons. A hearing was scheduled for 29 August 2002. 24.  Between 29 August and 15 October 2002 three hearings did not take place due to the applicant's failure to appear. 25.  On 13 November 2002 the District Court granted the applicant's claims in part awarding her a lump sum of 7,311 Russian roubles (RUB), RUB 3,600 in penalties and RUB 3,600 in legal expenses. 26.  On 3 April 2003 the Regional Court upheld the judgment. 27.  On 17 November 2003 the proceedings were deemed enforced in the part concerning the amount of RUB 7,311. 28.  On 13 December 2005 the District Court discontinued the enforcement proceedings against the company in the part concerning the remainder of the award due to the fact that the company had been liquidated in October 2005 and had no assets to cover the applicant's claims. 29.  It appears that the applicant did not appeal against this decision.