Facts
On May 27, 2013, B.A. (wife) filed for divorce against A.A. (husband) at the District Court of Baden. At the conciliation hearing on November 12, 2013, A.A. appeared accompanied by C., who is not a lawyer. The District Court confirmed by order on the same day that C. would not be admitted to represent A.A.
A.A. appealed this order to the High Court of the Canton of Aargau. The High Court dismissed the appeal, as it classified C. as a professional representative who is not permitted under Art. 68 para. 2 lit. a CPC.
A.A. then filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint and an appeal in civil matters with the Federal Supreme Court. He requested the annulment of the High Court's decision and the finding of a denial of justice and an obstruction of free postulation.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examined whether C. can be admitted as a representative of A.A. or whether he is acting as a professional and thus within the monopoly of lawyers.
The Federal Supreme Court concluded that C. is to be classified as a professional representative, as he was…