63. The Court emphasises that these proceedings, which began with a referral to the Kita Court of First Instance, relate to two hundred and seventy-nine (279) Claimants, sought to determine whether their dismissal following a strike was lawful and to examine subsequent claims. In addition, a number of incidental claims, including procedural objections, were raised at first instance. These two factors illustrate the complexity of the procedure before the domestic courts. 64. Furthermore, the Applicants do not show that there was any delay attributable to their former employer or to the judicial authorities during the various domestic proceedings. 65. With regard to the second issue, which is the period of two (2) years that elapsed between the referral judgment of the High Court and the judgment of the Bamako Court of Appeal, the Court notes that the opposing party, namely the former employer, had filed an application seeking to quash the judgment of the Supreme Court. It was on these grounds that the Court of Appeal ordered a stay of proceedings, at the request of BCM- The Supreme Court handed down its decision on the stay of proceedings on 27 June 2016. The Court considers that the existence of this procedure, which justified the stay of proceedings, had an impact on the duration of the proceedings before the Bamako Court of Appeal. 66. Thirdly, with regard to the proceedings staying execution which were pending at the time of filing the present Application, the Court notes that the judgment against which it was brought, namely the second judgment of the Supreme Court, was delivered on 17 April 2018. 67. The Court also notes that the motion for stay of proceedings was filed on 11 May 2018, that is, 24 days after the judgment to which it related. In addition, the Applicants paid the required fee and filed their pleadings on 6 August 2018, 16