CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 novembre 2017

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 3 November 2017   FIFTH SECTION Application no 29295/16 Friedrich-Carl FRANZ against Germany lodged on 20 May 2016 SUBJECT MATTER OF the CASE The application concerns the fairness of proceedings regarding the revocation of the applicant’s notary admission by the President of the Celle Court of Appeal. The applicant’s appeal against the revocation – in which the President of the Celle Court of Appeal was the defending party – was tried before the Celle Court of Appeal. The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the Celle Court of Appeal was not an independent and impartial tribunal in the proceedings at issue     QUESTION Has the applicant’s right to a fair trial, including a right to an independent and impartial tribunal, under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, been breached in that the Celle Court of Appeal decided in proceedings in which the President of the same Court was the defending party? In particular, given the supervisory and disciplinary powers of a President of a Court of Appeal, could the judges assigned to the notary chamber of the Court of Appeal be considered independent and impartial as well as to appear as such (see De   Cubber v. Belgium , 26 October 1984, § 26, Series A no. 8)?