4.  The applicant was born in 1935 and lives in Rischon Le Zion, Israel. 5.  The applicant had been receiving an old age pension until her departure to take up permanent residence in Israel in December 1997. Before her departure, she was paid, at her written request, six months’ pension in advance prior to the termination of such payments in accordance with section 92 of the Pensions Act. 6.  In January 1999 the applicant and her husband wrote a letter to the Pension Fund of Ukraine requesting the resumption of their pension payments. In a letter of 15 March 1999, the Pension Fund informed them that under section 92 of the Pensions Act an old-age pension was not paid to citizens residing permanently abroad and there were no legal grounds for resuming payment of their pensions. 7.  On 13 August 2001 the applicant lodged a complaint with the Pechersky District Court of Kyiv (hereafter – “the Pechersky Court”) against the Pension Fund. This complaint was transferred to the Kievsky District Court of Odessa within whose jurisdiction the applicant had resided prior to emigration. 8.  On 25 February 2004 that court found against the applicant, after establishing that the Pension Fund had acted in accordance with the law. 9.  On 13 September 2006 the Odessa Regional Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the first-instance court. The applicant appealed in cassation to the Supreme Court. 10.  On 16 November 2006 the Supreme Court transferred the applicant’s appeal to the Highest Administrative Court in accordance with the rules on jurisdiction. The proceedings are still pending. 11.  The applicant held an account in the Savings Bank. At the beginning of the 1990s her deposit, which was in karbovanets, significantly depreciated as a result of hyperinflation. 12.  In 1996 the Ukrainian authorities implemented a monetary reform intended to replace the former monetary unit, the karbovanets, with a new currency, the Ukrainian hryvna (українськa гривня, UAH), at an exchange rate of 100,000 karbovanets for 1 hryvna. 13.  On 21 November 1996 the Ukrainian Parliament enacted the Ukrainian Citizens’ Deposits (State Guarantee of Reimbursement) Act (Law no. 537/96). Pursuant to section 3 of that Act, the applicant’s deposit was indexed at a ratio of 1 karbovanets to 1.05 hryvnas. Section 7 established a system for the indexed savings to be repaid progressively, taking into account the account holder’s age, the amount on deposit and other criteria. Each year the Government brings in regulations specifying the categories of account holders entitled to receive compensation in the coming year. 14.  In April 2000 the applicant wrote a letter to the Savings Bank of Ukraine requesting the repayment of the entire indexed deposit. On 31 May 2000 the Bank replied that by law indexed deposits had to be paid gradually in accordance with the procedure laid down in the relevant legislation. 15.  On 20 September 2001 the applicant lodged a claim with the Pechersky Court against the Savings Bank seeking recovery of her indexed deposit in full. 16.  On 22 January 2002 the Pechersky Court rejected her claim. 17.  On 24 April 2002 it sent its decision of 22 January 2002 to a court in Israel to be officially served on the applicant. It appears that this was not done. 18.  According to the applicant on 24 December 2001 and 10 January 2002 the applicant wrote letters respectively to the Kyiv City Court and to the Supreme Court requesting information about the results of the examination of the case. The Supreme Court received the letter in August 2002 and requested the Pechersky Court to notify the applicant of the outcome of her case. 19.  The applicant maintained that she received a copy of the Pechersky Court judgment only in January 2004. She appealed to the Kyiv City Court of Appeal. 20.  On 28 May 2004 and 19 September 2006 the Kyiv City Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Pechersky District Court of 22 January 2002.