No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Civil Code Revision in Germany: The Experience in the Field of Contract Law*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 February 2016
Extract
In November 1964 the then Minister of Justice stated in the Knesset:
The Members of Knesset surely know that shortly after assuming office I outlined a broad plan to liberate the Israeli law from the shackles of foreign laws and foreign languages. The plan relates first to the Ottoman legislation which is still in force, in particular the civil law compilation known as the Mejelle, and also to Mandatory legislation. The intention is to replace the various chapters of the Mejelle with original Israeli statutes and perhaps later, at a second stage, to unify these statutes with other special statutes in one complete and homogeneous tractate that will serve as an exhaustive civil code.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press and The Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem 1985
References
1 Divrei HaKnesset 41 (1964) 462Google Scholar.
2 “General clauses” of the type of § 242 may serve the useful purpose of providing leeway to the judiciary to adapt the law to social change. On the other hand, history proves that “general clauses” are open to abuse as well. There is now a considerable body of literature in Germany demonstrating how the courts have during the Nazi regime in many cases used the “general clauses” such as § 242 as a means to uphold discriminatory action against Jews, to decree the invalidity of contracts made with Jews, or to permit the termination of an employment contract for no other reason than that the employee was a Jew. See, for example, Rüthers, , Die unbegrenzte Auslegung, Zum Wandel der Privatrechtsordnung im Nationalsozialismus (1968)Google Scholar.
3 BGH (1963) Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 99Google Scholar.
4 BGHZ 22, 90.
5 Gesetz zur Regelung des Rechts der Allgemeinen Geschäftsbedingungen vom 9.12.1976 (Bundesgesetzblatt I S. 3317). For a discussion of the Act in English see Sandrock, , “The Standard Terms Act 1976 of West Germany”, (1978) 26 Am. J. Comp. L. 551CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hahlo, , “Unfair Contract Terms in Civil-Law Systems,” (1981) 98 S. Afr. L. J. 70Google Scholar.
6 Gesetz zum Schutz der Teilnehmer am Fernunterricht vom 24.8.1976 (Bundesgesetzblatt I S. 2525).
7 See, for example, Reich, , “Zivilrechtstheorie, Sozialwissenschaften und Verbraucherschutz’, (1974), Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik 187Google Scholar; Reich, , Markt und Recht, Theorie und Praxis des Wirtschaftsrechts in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (1977) 194–196Google Scholar; Reich, /Micklitz, , Verbraucherschutzrecht in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (1980) 15Google Scholar; Hart, /Joerges, , “Verbraucherrecht und Marktökonomik”, in: Wirtschaftsrecht als Kritik des Privatrechts (1980), 83Google Scholar; Damm, , “Verbraucherrechtliche Sondergesetzgebung und Privatrechtssystem,” (1978) Juristenzeitung 173Google Scholar.
8 See, for example, Westermann, , “Sonderprivatrechtliche Sozialmodelle und das allgemeine Privatrecht”, (1978) 178 Archiv für die civilistische Praxis 150Google Scholar; Lieb, , “Sonderprivatvatrecht für Ungleichgewichtslagen?”, (1978) 178 Archiv für die civilistische Praxis 196Google Scholar.
9 See Wolf, A., “Weiterentwicklung und Überarbeitung des Schuldrechts”, (1978) Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik 249Google Scholar.
10 Bundesministerium der Justiz, (ed.), Gutachten and Vorschläge zur Überarbeitung des Schuldrechts, 3 vols. (1981)Google Scholar.
11 See Engelhard, , “Zu den Aufgaben einer Kommission für die Überarbeitung des Schuldrechts”, (1984) Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 1201Google Scholar.
12 Fenet, , Recueil complet de travaux préparatoires du Code civil (1836) vol. I, p. 470Google Scholar.
13 Llewellyn, , “The Bar's Troubles, and Poultices — and Cures?” (1938) 5 Law and Contemporary Problems 104, 118CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Cohn, , “The German Attorney”, (1960) 9 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 580, 586Google Scholar.