4.  The applicants were born in 1971 and 1975 respectively and live in the city of Komsomolsk. 5.  On 27 May 2006 Mr S., driving a bus, hit the applicants’ minor son who was later that day brought to hospital with severe injuries. On the same day police examined the scene of the accident, questioned S. and several other witnesses. 6.  On 1 June 2006 the applicants’ son died of numerous serious injuries caused by the above traffic accident. 7.  On 9 June 2006 the Komsomolsk Prosecutor’s Office refused to institute criminal proceedings against S. This refusal was quashed on 14 June 2006 by the same office and instructions were given as to further investigative actions. In particular, the police were instructed to find and examine the direct witness of the accident who was an employee of the Komsomolsk Department of State Postal Service (later it turned out to be B.). The case was transferred to the police for further inquiries. 8.  On 6 July 2006 the Poltava Regional Police Department instituted criminal proceedings into the traffic accident which led to the child’s death. 9.  On 13 July 2006 the applicants were officially recognised as aggrieved parties in the criminal proceedings. 10.  Between May 2006 and April 2007 the police conducted two technical and two medical forensic expert examinations, on-site traffic accident reconstructions, questioned S., the applicants and several other witnesses. 11.  From April 2007 until October 2009 the investigation was terminated on numerous occasions for lack of corpus delicti in the actions of S. Subsequently it was resumed by the investigator (in November 2007) or the above decisions were quashed by higher Prosecutor’s Office, due to various omissions in the investigation and with instructions to carry out further actions with a view to collecting evidence. 12.  On several occasions the criminal investigation was suspended because it was not possible to establish a person liable for the traffic accident. 13.  During the above period the police investigator examined several witnesses (including B. on 7 September 2009) and conducted one reconstruction. 14.  Between September 2010 and March 2012 the police conducted three additional technical forensic expert examinations, several on-site traffic accident reconstructions and questioned several witnesses. On several occasions the criminal investigation was suspended because of S.’s illness. 15.  On 5 October 2010 S. was for the first time officially recognised as a suspect in the criminal proceedings. 16.  On 26 March 2012 the case was referred to the Komsomolsk Court. 17.  On 4 April 2013 the Komsomolsk Court, having established that S. had committed the crime of negligence, amnestied him and left unexamined the applicants’ civil claim. 18.  On 25 June and 31 October 2013 the Poltava Regional Court of Appeal and the Higher Specialised Civil and Criminal Court upheld the judgment of 4 April 2013.