Hermann Epping

Hermann Friedrich Karl Wilhelm Epping (born May 20, 1875 in Lippstadt , † after 1945) was a German judge .

Life

Epping was the son of a Lippstadt merchant. He passed the Abitur at the Realgymnasium in Lippstadt in 1893. After studying law in Tübingen, Berlin and Marburg, Epping passed the first state legal examination in 1896 and the second in 1902, each with the grade "good". Since 1894 he was a member of the Corps Suevia Tübingen . In 1902 he became a court assessor at the Lippstadt District Court , later he was an assistant judge at the Essen District Court . In 1905 he was promoted to district judge and in 1910 transferred to Bielefeld . In 1912 and 1914 he was seconded to the Hamm Higher Regional Court as an assistant judge . In 1915 he was promoted to the district judge. In 1919, Epping became a higher regional judge in Naumburg . In 1927 he came to the Reichsgericht . For many years he was a member of the 5th Civil Senate and had a decisive influence on the decisions of the Senate. He was the rapporteur for the leading decisions RGZ 139, 29 and 150, 1. In March 1941, Epping retired. From April 1941 he returned to the Senate. In 1945 he was in the III. Civil Senate .

Memberships

1919–1927 in the DVP

Fonts

" The warranty due to defects in the purchased item according to the German Civil Code ", Diss. Erlangen 1897, Altenburg 1897.

literature

Werner Schubert : Academy for German Law. 1933–1945 - Minutes of the committees: Academy for German Law 1933–1945, Committees for Driving Law and Property Rights and joint meetings with the Committee for Land Law (1937–1942) Vol. III / 6, p. XXIII.

Individual evidence

↑ Kösener corps lists 1910, 197 , 26
^ Judgment of November 26, 1932, V 203/32. The so-called first Gutehoffnungshütte decision commented on the scope of the obligation to tolerate from § 906 BGB and in particular on "local use". For the interpretation “ according to the clear wording of the law ” it was based on the type of use of the damaging property. Because of this, industrial use could now be customary in an area, even if agricultural use predominated. In addition, compensation could now be demanded for inadmissible influences prior to filing an action without proof of fault.
↑ Judgment of March 13, 1936, GrSZ V 184/35: “ The essence of the concept of a 'violation of good morals' is given by the popular sentiment that has prevailed since the upheaval, the National Socialist worldview. With this content fulfilled, § 138 is also applicable to legal transactions from earlier times that have not yet been completed. “Up until the 1930s, the general opinion was that, in the case of the unworthiness judgment of the immorality of a legal transaction, only the evaluations and normative requirements at the time of execution should be taken into account. With the judgment, the Reichsgericht considered a retroactive application of Section 138 of the German Civil Code (BGB) to be possible. In addition, a reprehensible disposition was suspected in cases of gross disproportion in usury-like transactions .

personal data
SURNAME	Epping, Hermann
ALTERNATIVE NAMES	Epping, Hermann Friedrich Karl Wilhelm
BRIEF DESCRIPTION	German Imperial Judge
DATE OF BIRTH	May 20, 1875
PLACE OF BIRTH	Lippstadt
DATE OF DEATH	after 1945

[1] Kösener corps lists 1910, 197 , 26

[2] Judgment of November 26, 1932, V 203/32. The so-called first Gutehoffnungshütte decision commented on the scope of the obligation to tolerate from § 906 BGB and in particular on "local use". For the interpretation “ according to the clear wording of the law ” it was based on the type of use of the damaging property. Because of this, industrial use could now be customary in an area, even if agricultural use predominated. In addition, compensation could now be demanded for inadmissible influences prior to filing an action without proof of fault.

[3] Judgment of March 13, 1936, GrSZ V 184/35: “ The essence of the concept of a 'violation of good morals' is given by the popular sentiment that has prevailed since the upheaval, the National Socialist worldview. With this content fulfilled, § 138 is also applicable to legal transactions from earlier times that have not yet been completed. “Up until the 1930s, the general opinion was that, in the case of the unworthiness judgment of the immorality of a legal transaction, only the evaluations and normative requirements at the time of execution should be taken into account. With the judgment, the Reichsgericht considered a retroactive application of Section 138 of the German Civil Code (BGB) to be possible. In addition, a reprehensible disposition was suspected in cases of gross disproportion in usury-like transactions .