Listing 1 - 10 of 3503 | << page >> |
Sort by
|
Choose an application
Das BGB von 1900 gilt einerseits als Kodifikation mit klarem „liberalem“ bzw. „unsozialem“ Profil. Es galt andererseits im Kaiserreich, in Weimar, während des Nationalsozialismus, in der DDR bis 1976 und gilt bis heute in der Bundesrepublik. Wie kann ein rechtspolitisch so festgelegtes Gesetz so völlig unterschiedlichen Werteordnungen dienen? Wurde das BGB den wandelnden Umständen angepasst? Wer tat dies? Der Gesetzgeber, die Judikatur oder die Rechtswissenschaft?Das vorliegende Studienbuch zeichnet die Entstehung und die Geltungsgeschichte der deutschen Privatrechtskodifikation nach. Ziel ist es, der scheinbar zeitlosen Welt des BGB eine historisch-politische Dimension zurückzugeben. In den Blick geraten dabei die Kodifikationsgeschichte, Dogmengeschichte, Justiz- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte und die Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts. Zielpublikum sind Studierende und Privatrechtwissenschaftler.
Choose an application
"On 5 May 2020, the red-robed judges of the German Federal Constitutional Court (GFCC) shocked Europe. In a ruling on the Public Sector Purchasing Programme (PSPP), a quantitative easing programme of the European Central Bank (ECB), they concluded that the central bank had failed to substantiate the programme's proportionality. As a result, the German judges ruled that the PSPP was ultra vires, that is, beyond the scope of the central bank's competences. In reaching that conclusion they set aside the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), which had previously upheld the programme, as 'simply not comprehensible' and 'objectively arbitrary'. Having long retained the right to rule on the scope of the EU's competences, the German judges had always refrained from taking the ultimate step of declaring EU law inapplicable within the German legal order. This time was different. The judgment led to a flood of critique among commentators across Europe, both in the popular media, as well as among legal experts. Some held that the judgment threatened the existence of the euro. Martin Sandbu of the Financial Times called the verdict a 'bomb under the EU legal order'. In the same newspaper Martin Wolf went so far as to state that future historians might mark the ruling 'as the decisive turning point in Europe's history towards disintegration'"--
Choose an application
Choose an application
PROCEDURE PENALE --- ALLEMAGNE --- ALLEMAGNE
Choose an application
PROCEDURE PENALE --- ALLEMAGNE --- ALLEMAGNE
Choose an application
PROCEDURE PENALE --- ALLEMAGNE --- ALLEMAGNE
Choose an application
PROCEDURE PENALE --- ALLEMAGNE --- ALLEMAGNE
Choose an application
Choose an application
Listing 1 - 10 of 3503 | << page >> |
Sort by
|