5.  The applicants were owners of plots of land. The municipal authorities reclaimed the plots of land, and the applicants’ title to the real property in question was annulled. The details pertaining to each application are provided below. 6.  The applicant in this case is Oleg Dmitriyevich Sergunin, who was born on 10 December 1967 and lives in Kazan. 7.  On 5 September 2009 the local council transferred the title to a plot of land in Privolzhskiy district, Kazan, to G. The relevant documents confirming that the plot of land had been earlier assigned to G. had been prepared by Gib. The State land registry verified the legitimacy of the transaction and registered G.’s title to the plot of land. 8.  On 10 December 2009 G. sold the plot of land to M. On 8 February 2010 M. sold the plot of land to N. On 16 March 2012 N. sold the plot of land to the applicant. Each time the transfer of the title to a new owner was verified and registered by the State authorities with the issuance of the relevant certificate. 9.  On 13 March 2013 the Privolzhskiy District Court of Kazan found Gib. guilty of having committed fraud in respect of the transfer of the plot of land to G. 10.  On 5 July 2013 a prosecutor acting on behalf of the local council brought an action seeking invalidation of the decision of the local council of 5 September 2009, invalidation of the applicant’s title to the plot of land and return of the plot of land to the municipality. 11.  On 17 October 2013 the District Court granted the claims in full. 12.  On 23 January 2014 the Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan upheld the judgment of 17 October 2013 on appeal. 13.  On 14 April 2014 the Supreme Court rejected an appeal on points of law by the applicant. 14.  On 30 May 2014 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation rejected a second appeal on points of law lodged by the applicant. 15.  The applicant in this case is Dmitriy Gennadyevich Isupov who was born on 7 May 1978 and lives in Kirov. 16.  On 3 December 2009 the applicant bought a plot of land and a share in another plot of land in Sloboda Solomintsy, Kirov, from S. and T. respectively. The State land registry verified the legitimacy of the transaction and registered the applicant’s title to the plots of land. 17.  On an unspecified date the district prosecutor brought an action on behalf of the Kirov City Council with the aim of reclaiming the real property. 18.  On 14 May 2014 the Novovyatskiy District Court of Kirov delivered two judgments, allowing the prosecutor’s claims in full. The court noted that the decisions allegedly issued by the local council assigning the plots of land to T. and S. had been forged and could not have served as a legal basis for the transactions in respect of the plots of land. The court recognised the town’s title to the plots of land and ordered their transfer to the town administration. 19.  On 15 and 23 July 2014 the Kirov Regional Court upheld the judgments of 14 May 2014 on appeal. 20.  On 22 August the Regional Court dismissed an appeal on points of law lodged by the applicant against the above judgments. 21.  On 11 March 2015 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dismissed a second appeal on points law lodged by the applicant against the judgments of 14 May and 15 June 2015. 22.  The applicant in this case is Sergey Vasilyevich Prokudin who was born on 19 October 1958 and lives in Kirov. 23.  The applicant bought six plots of land in Sloboda Lyangasy, Kirov, from S., A., M., K., Kuz., and R. respectively. The State land registry verified the legitimacy of the transactions and registered the applicant’s title to the plots of land. 24.  On an unspecified date the district prosecutor brought an action on behalf of the Kirov City Council with the aim of reclaiming the real property. 25.  On 9 and 10 June 2014 the Novovyatskiy District Court of Kirov delivered six judgments, granting the prosecutor’s claims in full. The court noted that the decisions allegedly issued by the district administration assigning the plots of land to S., A., M., K., Kuz., and R. had been forged and could not have served as a legal basis for the transactions in respect of the plots of land. The court recognised the city’s title to the plots of land and ordered their transfer to the council. 26.  On 21 and 28 August and 2 September 2014 the Kirov Regional Court upheld the judgments of 9 and 10 June 2014 on appeal. 27.  On 19 January 2015 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dismissed an appeal on points of law lodged by the applicant against the above judgments.