Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T03:03:45.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Kant and Private International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

Kurt Siehr
Affiliation:
Professor of Law, University of Zürich.
Get access

Extract

Hamburg may not be known as a city of art, science and culture. It is a port and a place of business and commerce. The cultural treasures of Hamburg do not originate from princely collections. They were bought by the city of Hamburg or were donated by citizens. One of these important testamentary bequests is exhibited in the Hamburger Kunsthalle: the marble bust of Immanuel Kant by Carl Friedrich Hagemann (1773-1806), a pupil of Johann Gottfried Schadow (1764-1850). This bust, which is said to be the most impressive portrait of the philosopher of Königsberg, was commissioned by Jonas Ludwig von HeG (1756-1823), a student of the Albertus University of Königsberg, author of historical and scientific works and admirer of Immanuel Kant. Since that time many authorities and followers of Kant have been domiciled in Hamburg. To one of the present advocates of Kant's legal philosophy – Professor Ernst-JoachimMestmäcker – these lines are dedicated.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press and the Authors 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Joist, Grolle, Kant in Hamburg. Der Philosoph und sein Bildnis (Hamburg: Hamburger Kunsthalle 1995).Google Scholar

2 Günter, Herrmann, Johann Nikolaus Hert und die deutsche Statutenlehre (Berlin: de Gruyter 1963) at p. 158Google Scholar; cf. also Max, Gutzwiller, Geschichte des Internationalprivatrechts (Basel/Stuttgart: Helbing & Lichtenhahn 1977) at pp. 191200Google Scholar (Cocceji) and at pp. 201-209 (Hert).

3 Herrmann, supra n. 2,160; cf. the translated new edition of “De collisio legum dissertatio” in: Christian, v. Bar, / Peter, Dopffel, Deutsches Internationales Privatrecht im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert II (Tübingen: Mohr 2001) at pp. 588 et seq.Google Scholar

4 Herrmann, supra n. 2, at p. 174.

5 Hans, Hattenhauer in: Allgemeines Landrecht für die Preuβischen Staaten von 1794. Textausgabe (Frankfurt a.M., Berlin: Metzner 1970) 11, at pp. 12 et seq.Google Scholar

6 Hattenhauer, supra n. 5, at pp. 13 et seq.

7 Kant, , Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten (Riga: Hartknoch 1785) 52Google Scholar = Kant, , Werke in sechs Bänden (Weischedel, W. [ed.]), IV (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 1956) 51.Google Scholar

8 Kant, , Die Metaphysik der Sitten. Erster Theil: metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Rechtslehre (Königsberg: Nicolovius 1797) 33Google Scholar = Kant, supra n. 7, at p. 337.

9 Joseph, Story, Commentaries on the Conflict of Laws (Boston: Billiard, Gray & Co. 1834) § 9, at p. 9Google Scholar: “This branch of public law [conflict of the laws] may be fitly denominated private international law, since it is chiefly seen and felt in its application to the common business of private persons, and rarely rises to the dignity of national negotiations, or national controversies.” John, Westlake, A Treatise on Private International Law or The Conflict of Laws (London: Maxwell 1858) at p. 1.Google Scholar

10 Wilhelm, Schaeffner, Entwicklung des internationalen Privatrechts (Frankfurt am Main: Sauerländer 1841) at p. 3.Google Scholar

11 Asser, T.M.C., Schets van het internationaal privaatrecht (Haarlem: Bohn 1880) at pp. 1 et seq.Google Scholar

12 Jean-Jacques, Gaspard Foelix, Traité de droit international privé ou du conflit des lois de différentes nations en matière de droit privé (Paris: Joubert 1843) at p. 2Google Scholar; François, Laurent, Droit civil international I (Bruxelles/Paris: Bruyland/Marescq 1880) at pp. 9 et seq.Google Scholar

13 Manuel Torres, Campos, Principios de derecho internacional privado ó de derecho extraterritorial de Europa y America en sus relaciones con el derecho civil de España (Madrid 1881).Google Scholar

14 Niccola, Rocco, Dell'uso e autorità delle leggi del Regno delle Due Sicilie ossia Trattato di diritto civile internazionale, 2nd ed. (Palermo: Garofalo 1843)Google Scholar; Pietro, Fiorentino, Saggio di un esame critico del codici italiani sulle disposizioni generali premesse al Codice civile e specialmente su quelle che riguardano il diritto internazionale privato (Messina: Tipografia del Commercia 1869) at pp. 113 et seq.Google Scholar

15 Austrian IPR-Gesetz of 1978 § 9 (1) sent. 3; German EGBGB Article 5 (1) sent. 1; Italian Legge D.I.P. of 1995 Article 19 (2) sent. 1; Swiss IPRG of 1987 Article 23 (2).

16 Austrian IPR-Gesetz of 1978 § 9 (1) sent. 2; German EGBGB of 1986 Article 5 (1) sent. 2; Italian legge D.I.P. of 1995 Article 19 (2) sent. 2.

17 Siehr, in: Münchener Kommentar zum BGB, vol. X, 3rd ed. (Munich 1998)Google Scholar Article 14 EGBGB, marginal note 22.

18 In 1948-1961 William L. Prosser was Dean of the Law School of the University of California at Berkeley. He wrote the “Handbook of the Law of Torts”, 4th ed. (St. Paul, Minn.: West 1971)Google Scholar and edited the collection “The Judicial Humorist” (Boston: Little, Brown & Co. 1952, reprint Littleton: Rothman 1989).Google Scholar

19 Prosser, William L., “Interstate Publications”, 51 Mich.L.Rev. (1952/1953) 959, 971CrossRefGoogle Scholar = id., Selected Topics on the Law of Torts (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press 1953) 70, 89Google Scholar = Culp, (ed.), Selected Readings on Conflict of Laws (St. Paul, Minn.: West 1956) 585, 591.Google Scholar

20 John, Westlake, A Treatise on Private International Law, 5th ed. (London: Sweet & Maxwell 1912) 31.Google Scholar

21 Arthur Taylor, von Mehren/ Donald Theodore, Trautman, The Law of Multistate Problems (Boston/ Toronto: Little, Brown & Co. 1965) at p. 513.Google Scholar

22 John Delatre, Falconbridge, “Partial Renvoi and Total Renvoi”, in: id., Essays on the Conflict of Laws, 2nd ed. (Totonto, Canada: Law Book Co. 1954) 170, 187.Google Scholar

23 Cf. Kurt, Siehr, “Renvoi: A Necessary Evil or is it Possible to Abolish it by Statute?” in: Ian, Flechter/Loukas, Mistelis/Marise, Cremona (eds.), Foundations and Perspectives of International Trade Law (London: Sweet & Maxwell 2001) at p. 204.Google Scholar

24 Cf., e.g., Article 32 of the Greek Civil Code.

25 Cf., Article 18 (1) of the Portuguese C6digo civil.

26 Cf., e.g., § 5 (2) Austrian Statute on Private International Law; Article 4 (1) sent. 2 EGBGB.

27 Case C-212/97 (Centros Ltd. v. Erhvervs- og Selskabsstyrelsen), [1999] ECR I-1459, and Behrens, , “International Company Law in View of the Centros Case”, 1 EBOR (2000) 125.Google Scholar

28 Cf., e.g. EU Regulation 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on Jurisdiction and Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, OJ(EC) [2001] L 12/1.

29 Cf., e.g., § 328 (1) No. 1 German Code of Civil Procedure.

30 Cf. Articles 65 (2) (a), 149 (2) (a), (c), (e) and (f) Swiss IPRG of 1987.

31 Cf. § 328 (1) No. 5 German Code of Civil Procedure; Article 167 (1) (c) Romanian Statutes on Private International Law; Article 166 (1) Swiss IPRG of 1987. Cf. already Foelix, supra n. 12, at pp. 376 et seq.

32 Friedrich, Nietzsche, “Aus dem Nachlaß der Achtzigerjahre”, in: id., Werke III (Schlechta, K. [ed.]) (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 1966) 415, 670.Google Scholar

33 Scholtens, J.M.B., Het begrip comitas in het inernationaal privaatrecht van de hollandse juristenschool der Zeventiende eeuw (Utrecht/ Nijmegen: Dekker & van de Vegt 1949) at pp. 11 et seq.Google Scholar; Alan, Watson, Josep Story and the Comity of Errors (Athens/ London: University of Georgia Press 1992) at pp. 18 et seq.Google Scholar

34 Wilhelm, Weischedel, “Kant und die Pünktlichkeit des Denkens”, in: id., 34 groβe Philosophen in Alltag und Denken. Die philosophische Hintertreppe, 16th ed. (Munich: Nymphenburger 1990) at p. 213.Google Scholar

35 Immanuel, Kant, Die Kritik der Urteilskraft, 2nd ed. (Berlin: Lagarde 1793) at p. 223Google Scholar = Kant, Werke, supra n. 7, vol. V, at p. 434.

36 Immanuel, Kant, Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung (1783)Google Scholar, in: Kant, Werke, supra n. 7, vol. VI, at p. 53: “Habe Mut, dich deines eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen!”