4.  The applicant was born in 1961 and lives in Pernik. 5.  Her mother owned a house with a yard in the city, which were expropriated in 1978 on the basis of section 98 (1) of the Territorial and Urban Planning Act of 1973 (Закон за териториалното и селищно устройство – “the TUPA”) with a view to constructing a highway. It was stated in the expropriation decision that the applicant’s mother was to be compensated with a three-room flat, and the applicant was to receive a two‑room flat. 6.  The flat that the applicant’s mother was due was constructed and provided to her in 1985. Until then the family lived in a municipally-owned dwelling. 7.  The expropriated house was pulled down in 1986. 8.  In a decision of 14 July 2000, issued on the basis of section 100 of the TUPA, the Pernik mayor indicated the exact flat to be provided to the applicant. It measured 75 square metres and was situated in a building under construction. It was stated in the decision that the flat’s value was 22,424.84 Bulgarian levs (BGN), although it was not specified whether this amount took into account the value of the expropriated properties. Later on in 2000 the applicant paid to the municipality BGN 28,000 for the flat’s value; it is unclear how this amount was arrived at. 9.  The building where the flat was situated was completed in 2003, but the flat that the applicant was due was never handed over to her. The applicant was told that it had been transferred by the municipality to third parties. 10.  In the following years the applicant and her mother filed complaints with the regional governor, the Prime Minister and the Parliament. 11.  The authorities have not yet fulfilled their obligation to provide the applicant with a flat. The applicant states that she does not have another dwelling and that together with her husband and children she has been living with her parents in their flat.