Abstract
In two decisions delivered inFebruary and March 2001, the German FederalConstitutional Court voided the maritalagreements struck between a man and a pregnantwoman on the grounds that they were the productof an inequality of bargaining power betweenthe parties. These findings, involving anapplication of the fundamental rightsprovisions of the German Basic Law to privateagreements, demonstrate the creeping competenceof the F.C.C. into the sphere of contractualrelations and an ongoing questioning ofthe traditional public/private law divide. Exploring some of the implications of applyingpublic values and constitutional reviewstandards to private agreements, this notecontextualises the decisions within the debateupon competing (and ultimately colliding)social systems of the family and the market.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
REFERENCES
Biggs, H. and MacKenzie, R., eds.,”Feminist Perspectives on Obligations”, Feminist Legal Studies 8 (2000).
Boyd, S.B., ed., Challenging the Public/Private Divide: Feminism, Law and Public Policy (Toronto: Toronto University Press, 1997).
Brown, W., States of Injury: Power and Freedom in Late Modernity (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995).
Diederichsen, U.,”Das Bundesverfassungsgericht als oberstes Zivilgericht-ein Lehrstück der juristischen Methodenlehre”, Archiv für die civilistische Praxis (AcP) 198 (1998), 17–260.
Markesinis, B., Always on the Same Path: Essays on Foreign Law and Comparative Methodology, Vol. 2 (Oxford: Hart, 2001).
Morris, D.,”SuretyWives in the House of Lords: Time for Solicitors to 'Get Real'? Royal Bank of Scotland plc v. Etridge (No. 2) [2001] 4 All E.R. 449”, Feminist Legal Studies (this issue, 5–69).
Olsen, F.,”The Family and the Market: A Study of Ideology and Legal Reform”, Harvard Law Review 96 (1983), 149–1578.
Pateman, C., The Sexual Contract (Stanford: Stanford University Press. 1998). 21 The relational nature of contractual relations has been explored in a special issue of Feminist Legal Studies: see Biggs and MacKenzie (2000) and, in particular, Wightman (2000).
Teubner, G.,”Ein Fall von struktureller Korruption? Die Familienbürgschaft in der Kollision unverträglicher Handlungslogiken (BVerfGE 89, 214 ff.)”, Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft (KritV) 83 (2000), 38–404.
Thornton, M., ed., Public and Private: Feminist Legal Debates (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995).
Wightman, J.,”Intimate Relationships, Relational Contract Theory, and the Reach of Contract”, Feminist Legal Studies 8 (2000), 9–131.
Zumbansen, P., “Commentary on the Decision of the Federal Constitutional Court of 6February 2001”, German Law Journal 2/6 (2001a); available at http://www.germanlaw—journal.com/past_issues.php?id=61.
Zumbansen, P., “Commentary on the Decision of the Federal Constitutional Court of 29March 2001”, German Law Journal 2/15 (2001a); available at http://www.germanlaw—journal.com/past_issues.php?id=86.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zumbansen, P. Public Values, Private Contractsand the Colliding Worlds of Family and Market:German Federal Constitutional Court,`Marital Agreement' Decisions of 6 February2001 and 29 March 2001 . Feminist Legal Studies 11, 71–84 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023249005092
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023249005092