6.  The applicant was born in 1955 and lives in Makhachkala, Republic of Dagestan. 7.  In 1990 the applicant started living with Ms T.K. 8.  In 1991 and 1992 they had two daughters, Kr. (born on 1 July 1991) and K. (born on 13 July 1992). The applicant did not register his paternity. 9.  In 2002 the applicant and T.K. separated. Both girls continued living with the applicant. 10.  In 2004 T.K. married Yu.K. 11.  In May 2004 Yu.K. registered his paternity in respect of Kr. and K. However, the girls still remained living with the applicant. 12.  In July 2007 K. stopped attending school, frequently ran away from home and exhibited delinquent behaviour. She allegedly stole her mother’s jewellery. 13.  In December 2007, following an application by T.K., K. was placed in a temporary detention centre for juvenile offenders. 14.  On 18 February 2008 the Kirovskiy District Court of Makhachkala (“the District Court”), sitting in a single-judge formation composed of Judge I., granted an application lodged by the administration of the Kirovskiy District of Makhachkala to place K. in a closed educational institution for minors for two years and five months. In taking this decision the District Court relied on the following circumstances: K.’s not attending school, running away from home, vagabonding and leading an anti-social and immoral lifestyle, as well as unsuccessful attempts to discipline K. and her being detained in the temporary detention centre for juvenile offenders. 15.  On an unspecified date shortly afterwards K. was placed in a closed educational institution for minors in the town of Pokrov, Vladimir Region, some 2,500 km from her home town of Makhachkala. According to the applicant, his daughter’s correspondence with him was subjected to censorship by the facility’s administration. 16.  In the meantime, the applicant brought proceedings seeking the establishment of his paternity vis-à-vis Kr. and K. 17.  On 9 April 2008 the District Court established the applicant’s paternity in respect of Kr. and K. and annuled the registration of Yu.K. as the girls’ father. 18.  At the applicant’s request, the Prosecutor of the Republic of Dagestan applied to the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Dagestan for a supervisory review of the decision of 18 February 2008. 19.  The present application was already pending before the European Court of Human Rights when, on 7 August 2008, the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Dagestan, by way of a supervisory review, quashed the decision of 18 February 2008 as unlawful and unjustified, and discontinued the proceedings. The court held, in particular, that in violation of the procedure established by the Federal Law on Basic Measures for Preventing Child Neglect and Delinquency of Minors, no. 120-FZ of 24 June 1999 (“the Minors Act”), the District Court had decided to place K. in a closed educational institution for minors in the absence of a decision refusing to institute criminal proceedings or a decision to discontinue the criminal proceedings against the latter, and without her having undergone a prior medical examination. 20.  On 30 September 2008 K. was released from the closed educational institution for minors and returned home.