THE FACTS I.     THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 5.     The applicant was born in 1970 and lives in Sofia.

THE FACTS THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 6.     The first applicant was born in 1954 and lives in Yerevan.

No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing)

THE FACTS I.     THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 5.     The applicant was born in 1976 and is detained in Poarta Albă Prison. 6.

[a fair hearing before a] ... tribunal ... [in the determination] ... of his [or her] rights and obligations ...”

No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Civil proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing)

Porter [2001] UKHL   67, Lord Hope of Craighead considered the question of apparent bias and concluded that: “The question is whether the fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts

It is for you to decide whether it is fair to hold that failure against him.

No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing)

The applicant complains, under Article 6 §§ 1 and   3   (d) of the Convention, that the criminal proceedings taken as a whole violated his right to a fair trial. THE FACTS 2.

THE FACTS I.     THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 5.     The applicant was born in 1960 and lives in Zabrze. 6.

It held that the Regional Court had established all relevant facts and had applied the relevant law correctly.

    The facts of the case may be summarised as follows. BACKGROUND 5 .

    The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. Background to the case 5 .

Toutefois, en cas de faute grave, le chef d'entreprise a la faculté de prononcer la mise à pied immédiate de l'intéressé en attendant la décision définitive.

X... le motif tiré de son insuffisance professionnelle ; Sur le motif tiré des fautes disciplinaires : Considérant que l'office prétend enfin justifier la décision de licenciement par des fautes graves

X... pour faute grave ; Vu les autres pièces du dossier ; Vu le code des tribunaux administratifs ; Vu le code du travail ; Vu l'ordonnance du 31 juillet 1945 et le décret du 30 septembre 1953 ; Vu la

Y... est constitutif d'une faute d'une gravité suffisante pour justifier son licenciement ; que, dès lors, la SOCIETE ALSACIENNE DE SUPERMARCHES est fondée à demander l'annulation de la décision du ministre

ministre du travail, de l'emploi et de la formation professionnelle a réformé la décision de l'inspecteur du travail du 9 mai 1984 autorisant la Société anonyme "IMPRESSION ET PUBLICITE" à licencier pour faute