2 MOREIRA BARBOSA v. PORTUGAL DECISION 20 September 1999, it was unable to issue an order to expedite the proceedings. On 18 February 2000 the judge, at the request of the public prosecutor’s office, ordered the registry to make enquiries to the tax and social-security authorities with a view to ascertaining the defendant’s whereabouts. On 29 April 2000 the Republican National Guard informed the court of the defendant’s new address. In an order of 30 May 2000 the judge set the case down for hearing on 30 June 2000 or, if the hearing could not take place on that date, on 20 October 2000. The defendant did not appear in court. He was accordingly tried in absentia at a hearing on 11 December 2000. In a judgment of 14 December 2000 he was found guilty and fined 150,000 Portuguese escudos (PTE). He was also ordered to pay the applicant PTE 1,500,000 in damages, together with interest. On 30 January 2001 the applicant brought proceedings in the Matosinhos Criminal Court for the enforcement of the judgment in so far as it concerned the payment of the damages awarded. On 6 February 2001 the judge ordered the attachment of the debtor’s property. The attachment was carried out on 22 November 2001. On 7 May 2002 the judge ordered the sale by the court of the property in question. The enforcement proceedings are still pending. COMPLAINT Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant complained of the length of the proceedings. THE LAW The applicant complained of the length of the proceedings. He relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which provides, inter alia: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ..., everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by [a]... tribunal ...” A. Exhaustion of domestic remedies The Government objected that the applicant had failed to exhaust domestic remedies.