5.  On 23 October 1984 the Second Municipal Court (Drugi opštinski sud) in Belgrade issued a judgment stating, inter alia, that the applicant was the owner of 36% of a flat and a garage located in Belgrade. The remaining 64% was determined to be the property of D.S., the applicant's former partner. On 25 June 1985 this judgment became final. 6.  In a separate set of proceedings, on 30 March 1987, the Fourth Municipal Court (Četvrti opštinski sud) in Belgrade ruled that the physical division of the said real estate was impossible, that a public auction should be held instead, and that the proceeds thereof should be divided among the former partners accordingly. 7.  On 16 November 1987 this decision became final. 8.  On 18 May 1990 the Fourth Municipal Court in Belgrade (hereinafter “the enforcement court”) accepted the applicant's request and ordered the enforcement of the above decision dated 30 March 1987. 9.  At the hearing held on 2 September 1996 the applicant offered to buy the 64% of the flat in question owned by D.S. and thereby become its sole owner. On the same date the enforcement court accepted this offer, “awarded” the flat (“dosudio nepokretnosi”) to the applicant and set the price at 25,126.22 Dinars. D.S. subsequently filed an appeal against this decision. 10.  Following a remittal, on 26 April 2002 the District Court upheld the decision of the enforcement court and it thereby became final. 11.  On 3 March 2004 the Supreme Court accepted the request for the protection of legality (zahtev za zaštitu zakonitosti) filed by the Chief Public Prosecutor personally. It quashed the lower courts' decisions and remitted the case to the enforcement court for reconsideration. It would appear that the Supreme Court's decision was served on the applicant by 12 January 2005. 12.  Following their separation in 1978, D.S. retained sole possession of the flat in question while the applicant appears to have had no access since then. 13.  On 20 October 2006 the applicant was given back the nominal value of the amount paid pursuant to the decision of 2 September 1996 (see paragraph 9 above). 14.  On 2 September 2007 the applicant died. 15.  On 21 September 2007 the Fourth Municipal Court suspended the proceedings pending the determination of the applicant's legal heirs. 16.  On 10 October 2008 the applicant's son, as her only legal heir, requested the continuation of the proceedings. 17.  It would appear that there have been no further developments in the case since then.