Lex Miquel-Lasker
| Basic data | |
|---|---|
| Title: | Law concerning the amendment of No. 13 of Article 4 of the Reich Constitution |
| Short title: | Lex Miquel-Lasker ( coll. ) |
| Type: | Imperial Law |
| Scope: | German Empire |
| Legal matter: | Administration of justice , civil law , criminal law |
| Issued on: | December 20, 1873 ( RGBl. P. 379) |
| Entry into force on: | January 7, 1874 |
| Please note the note on the applicable legal version. | |
The Lex Miquel-Lasker is a constitution- amending Reich law of December 20, 1873 ( RGBl. 1873 p. 379). As a result of the change, the empire's legislative competence was expanded to include all civil law.
designation
The official name of the law is Law, concerning the amendment of No. 13 of Article 4 of the Reich Constitution .
Lex is the Latin word for law . The Reichstag MPs Johannes Miquel and Eduard Lasker introduced the bill to the Reichstag together with other MPs on March 19, 1873. Miquel and Lasker belonged to the National Liberal Party , which emerged from the Reichstag election in 1871 as the largest parliamentary group . The application of March 19, 1873 was ultimately successful, but it was preceded by several identical attempts.
content
According to Article 1 of the Reich Constitution, the German Reich consisted of 25 member states . As early as 1871, Article 4 of the constitution stipulated which areas of law could be regulated uniformly by the Reich and which by the member states individually. That is, Article 4 enumerated all areas of law to which the Reich was entitled. And for all areas not mentioned here, the Reich had no legislative competence .
The Lex Miquel-Lasker actually changed very little text of the Imperial Constitution: the change only affected Article 4 No. 13, because here the words "Law of Obligations", "Commercial and Bill of Exchange Law" were deleted, and the The phrase "all civil law" is set. Still, the consequences were far-reaching. The Reich level now had the competence to regulate all civil law independently. Without this constitutional amendment, the Reichstag would not have been able to pass the BGB in the summer of 1896, for example , because without an amendment, such as that brought about by the Lex Miquel-Lasker, it would have lacked the legislative competence.
The wording of Article 4 of the Imperial Constitution was changed
In the version of April 16, 1871 (RGBl. 1871 p. 66):
Der Beaufsichtigung Seitens des Reichs und der Gesetzgebung desselben unterliegen die nachstehenden Angelegenheiten: […] Nr. 13 die gemeinsame Gesetzgebung über das Obligationenrecht [Schuldrecht], Strafrecht, Handels- und Wechselrecht und das gerichtliche Verfahren;
In the new version of December 20, 1873 (RGBl. 1873 p. 379):
Der Beaufsichtigung Seitens des Reichs und der Gesetzgebung desselben unterliegen die nachstehenden Angelegenheiten: […] Nr. 13 die gemeinsame Gesetzgebung über das gesamte bürgerliche Recht, das Strafrecht und das gerichtliche Verfahren;
Legislation course
Requests of March 16, 1867 (Lasker) and March 18, 1867 (Miquel)
In the spring of 1867 the newly founded North German Confederation was to be given a constitution. The Prussian government had already had a draft drawn up, and a constituent assembly was elected on February 12th, which discussed the text in 35 sessions (cf. Reichstag election February 1867 ). In Article 4 of the draft constitution, divided into 13 numbers, the areas of law were listed for which the North German Confederation was to receive legislative competence. With the number 13 three areas of civil law were named, as well as civil procedural law. MEPs Lasker and Miquel, however, wanted more extensive competencies and everyone therefore proposed an amendment. The different ideas can be found in the following table:
| Field of law | Draft constitution | Lasker's request | Miquel application |
|---|---|---|---|
| civil right | Bankruptcy proceedings commercial law bills of exchange law |
Law of obligations commercial law law of bills of exchange |
All civil law |
| Criminal law | No regulation | All the criminal law | All the criminal law |
| Procedural law | Civil procedural law only | All of the procedural law | All of the procedural law |
The motions were negotiated in the 16th session, on March 20, 1867. A member of parliament wanted all areas of law that Miquel had listed in his motion to be voted on individually, which was what happened. First of all, there was a vote on the point “all civil law”. That was rejected, the majority of the MPs spoke out against it. Then Miquel dropped his motion altogether, because the other points coincided with Lasker's motion, which was voted on immediately afterwards and which was accepted by the majority.
From all of this it follows that Article 4, Number 13 of the Imperial Constitution, which was later changed by the Lex Miquel-Lasker, goes back to Eduard Lasker himself. And that the idea of granting the Reich legislative competence over all civil law was already included in the motion of the MP Miquel on March 20, 1867.
Requests from 1869
Two other motions for a resolution are not dated, but probably date from 1869.
The third discussion of the motion took place at the 35th meeting on May 5, 1869. The motion was accepted by the majority.
Application dated October 25, 1871
The motion for a resolution is dated March 16, 1867.
The first and second deliberations took place at the 18th session on November 9, 1871.
The third meeting took place at the 21st meeting on November 15, 1871. The motion was accepted by a majority of the MPs.
Application dated March 19, 1873
The motion for a resolution is dated March 19, 1873.
The first discussion of the application took place on Wednesday, April 2, 1873.
Regulation in the Federal Republic of Germany
The Lex Miquel-Lasker gave the empire the authority to regulate all civil law alone. This means that the member states of the empire were stripped of their legislative competence in this area.
In the Federal Republic of Germany , a different approach has been chosen, which, however, leads to a similar result.
- Article 73 of the Basic Law stipulates which areas of law can only be regulated by the federal government (one also speaks of exclusive legislative competence ); civil law is not mentioned here, and so it does not belong to the exclusive legislative competence of the federal government.
- Certain areas of law may be regulated independently by the states, but the states lose this right as soon as a federal law is passed; the law of the federal states only revives when the federal law ceases to be in force. This mechanism is called competing legislation . A definition of this term can also be found in the Basic Law itself; in . Article 72 . Section 1 states: "In the area of concurrent legislation, the states have the power to legislate as long as and to the extent the federal government has exercised its legislative power not by law use."
- However, it does not yet emerge from Article 72 (1) of the Basic Law which areas of law belong to the area of competing legislation. That was finally regulated only with Article 74.1 of the Basic Law. The federal states can enact their own laws in all areas of law mentioned here. But only if the federal government has not already passed its own law. And this right expires as soon as the federal government enacts such a law.
- In Art. 74, Paragraph 1, No. 1 of the Basic Law, civil law is mentioned, among other things. According to this, the German federal states would in principle have the option of regulating civil law themselves, but the Civil Code (BGB) had been in force since January 1, 1900 . And the Federal Republic incorporated this Reich Law through Article 123, Paragraph 1 and Article 125 of the Basic Law.
Web links
Footnotes
- ↑ Stenographic Reports on the Negotiations of the German Reichstag, 1873, Volume 3, p. 138 No. 19 - It is occasionally said that only Miquel and Lasker introduced the motion. This information can be found, for example, in Meyer's Großem Konversations-Lexikon, Volume 12, Leipzig 1908, p. 495 ( via Zeno.org ). But this assertion is incorrect, as can be seen from the shorthand report just quoted. Rather, the motion was introduced by a total of seven MPs: Eduard Lasker , August von Bernuth , Franz August Schenk von Stauffenberg , Chlodwig zu Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst , Karl Rudolf Friedenthal , Johannes von Miquel and Carl Herz .
- ↑ For the number of meetings cf. the table of contents in the stenographic reports on the negotiations of the Reichstag of the North German Confederation in 1867, Volume 1, Pages III to V.
- ^ Stenographic reports on the negotiations of the Reichstag of the North German Confederation in 1867, Volume 2, p. 12 .
- ^ Stenographic reports on the negotiations of the Reichstag of the North German Confederation in 1867, Volume 2, p. 40 bottom right (No. 16 III 4) . - Lasker's speech, which he gave before the Reichstag, can be found in Volume 1, pp. 284 f.
- ↑ Stenographic reports on the negotiations of the Reichstag of the North German Confederation in 1867, Volume 2, p. 49 No. 29 . - Miquel's speech, which he gave before the Reichstag, can be found in Volume 1, pp. 285 f.
- ^ In 1856, the Federal Assembly of the German Confederation commissioned a commission to draw up a commercial code. When the text of the General German Commercial Code was available, the German Confederation decided in May 1861 that its member states should be recommended to enact the text as a separate law on their territory .
- ↑ This area was already regulated by the General German Exchange Order (Reich Law of November 24, 1848).
- ^ Stenographic reports on the negotiations of the Reichstag of the North German Confederation in 1867, Volume 1, p. 292 .
- ↑ Stenographic reports on the negotiations of the Reichstag of the North German Confederation in 1869, Volume 3, p. 175 ; also p.471 .
- ^ Stenographic reports on the negotiations of the Reichstag of the North German Confederation in 1869, Volume 2, p. 833 , at the end of the right column, to p. 835
- ^ Reichstag protocols 1871, Volume 2, p. 71 f.
- ^ Reichstag protocols 1871, Volume 1, from pp. 206 to 224.
- ↑ Reichstag Protocols 1871, Volume 1, from pp. 276 to 290.
- ^ Reichstag protocols 1873, Volume 3, p. 138 No. 19 ( digitized via reichstagsprotocols.de ).
- ^ Reichstag protocols 1873, Volume 1, p. 167 to p. 182 .