4.  The applicant was born in 1931 and lives in Naples. 5.  The applicant is the owner of a flat in Naples, which he had let to M. D'A. 6.  In a registered letter of 12 April 1984, the applicant informed the tenant that he intended to terminate the lease on expiry of the term and asked her to vacate the premises. 7.  In a writ served on the tenant on 28 April 1984, the applicant reiterated his intention to terminate the lease and summoned the tenant to appear before the Naples Magistrate. 8.  By a decision of 16 July 1984, which was made enforceable on 17 October 1984, the Naples Magistrate upheld the validity of the notice to quit and ordered that the premises be vacated by 30 June 1986. 9.  The tenant objected to the Naples Magistrate decision and informed the applicant that she would not leave the premises. 10.  On 16 July 1990, the applicant served notice on the tenant requiring her to vacate the premises. 11.  On 17 September 1990, he informed the tenant that the order for possession would be enforced by a bailiff on 4 October 1990. 12.  Between 4 October 1990 and 25 November 1991, the bailiff made three attempts to recover possession. Each attempt proved unsuccessful, as the applicant was not entitled to police assistance in enforcing the order for possession. 13.  On 13 November 1992, the applicant served a second notice on the tenant requiring her to vacate the premises. 14.  On 24 December 1992, he informed the tenant that the order for possession would be enforced by a bailiff on 8 January 1993. 15.  Between 8 January 1993 and 16 September 1993, the bailiff made two unsuccessful attempts to recover possession. 16.  On 16 September 1993 the tenant asked for a suspension of the enforcement proceedings. 17.  On 16 July 1996, the applicant served a third notice on the tenant requiring her to vacate the premises. 18.  On 2 October 1996, he informed the tenant that the order for possession would be enforced by a bailiff on 10 October 1996. 19.  Between 10 October 1996 and 4 December 1998, the bailiff made eight unsuccessful attempts to recover possession. 20.  Pursuant to section 6 of Law no. 431/98, the tenant asked for a suspension of the enforcement proceedings. The Naples Court of Appeal decided to suspend it until 15 October 1999. 21.  On 9 November 1999, the applicant informed the tenant that the order for possession would be enforced by a bailiff on 19 November 1999. 22.  Between 19 November 1999 and 10 March 2000, the bailiff made four unsuccessful attempts to recover possession. 23.  On 28 February 2002, the applicant served a fourth notice on the tenant requiring her to vacate the premises. 24.  On 17 April 2002, the applicant informed the tenant that the order for possession would be enforced by a bailiff on 6 May 2002. 25.  On 2 May 2002, pursuant to section 80 of Law no. 388/00, the tenant asked for a suspension of the enforcement proceedings. 26.  On 20 June 2002, the law-decree no. 122 postponed the enforcement of the eviction proceedings until 30 June 2003. 27.  According to the last information submitted by the applicant on 12 September 2003, he had not yet recovered possession of the flat.