4.  The applicant was born in 1973 and lives in Ceske Budejovice (Czech Republic). 5.  On 26 August 1998 the Wels Regional Court (Landesgericht) issued an arrest warrant against the applicant, as he was suspected, inter alia, of having committed aggravated fraud on a commercial basis in several countries together with numerous other suspects, and of being a member of a criminal organization. 6.  On 12 September 1998 the applicant was arrested in Germany and extradited to Austria on an unspecified date. He remained in detention on remand until 23 July 1999. 7.  On 14 January 1999 the Wels Public Prosecutor’s Office (Staatsanwaltschaft) filed a bill of indictment against the applicant. The applicant’s objection against it was dismissed by the Linz Court of Appeal (Oberlandesgericht) on 26 March 1999. 8.  On 13 January 2003 the applicant filed a request under section 91 of the Courts Act (Gerichtsorganisationsgesetz) for the setting of a time-limit (Fristsetzungsantrag) in order to accelerate the proceedings. Thereupon, the Wels Regional Court held a first hearing on 25 March 2003. 9.  On 29 October 2003 the court decided to separate the proceedings against the applicant from those against the other accused. 10.  On 9 December 2003 the applicant requested that the trial against him be resumed. An oral hearing was held on 5 May 2004. 11.  In March and July 2004 the applicant filed further requests under section 91 of the Courts Act. 12.  On 6 December 2004 the applicant lodged an application with the Court (no. 127/05), complaining under Article 6 of the Convention about the length of the criminal proceedings against him. On 9 June 2008 the applicant and the Government agreed on a friendly settlement of that case against a payment of 12,300 euros (EUR) by the Government. Consequently, the Court decided to strike application no. 127/05 out of its list of cases (see Benes v. Austria (dec.) no. 127/05, 8 July 2008). 13.  On 4 September 2008, following the issuance of the above‑mentioned strike-out decision, the applicant requested the Wels Regional Court to discontinue the proceedings against him, or in the alternative to set a new date for a hearing as soon as possible. 14.  On 15 April 2009 the Wels Regional Court held another oral hearing. The applicant failed to attend because he had fallen ill. During that hearing, the public prosecutor lodged the request that another expert opinion be obtained, to which the Wels Regional Court acceded. 15.  The following oral hearing was set for 21 October 2009, but was cancelled because the court-appointed expert had informed the court that he would need three to five more weeks to finalise his opinion. Following an urgent reminder which the Wels Regional Court had sent to the expert, it learned on 18 October 2010 that the expert had passed away. On 1 September 2011 a new expert was appointed. 16.  On 1 September 2011, 17 November 2011 and 13 December 2012, the applicant filed further requests under section 91 of the Courts Act, which were dismissed by the Linz Court of Appeal on 7 November 2011, 1 February 2012 and 2 January 2013 respectively. In its last decision, the Court of Appeal observed that the expert opinion had been finalised and submitted to the trial court on 19 December 2012. 17.  On 28 May 2013 the Wels Regional Court acquitted the applicant from all charges, partly because his guilt could not be proven, partly because the public prosecutor had withdrawn the indictment.