Hier beschäftige ich mich mit dem Satz, daß zwei Gerichtsurteile des gleichen Inhaltes binnen zehn oder zwanzig Jahren ein Gewohnheitsrecht herbeiführen können. Dieser Satz ist auf Johannes Bassianus and Azo zurückzuführen and blieb wenigstens im Mittelalter der herschenden Meinung. Hostiensis and Jacobus de Ravanis fragten danach, ob auch die außergerichtlichen Handlungen für die Einführung eines Gewohnheitsrechts genügen. Ein Anlaß zu solcher Fragestellung bestand auch im damaligen Zustand des Kirchenrechts, daß das Gewohnheitsrecht vor allem in der Wahl gait. Nach der Bejahung dieser Frage tauchte ein weiteres Problem auf, ob and warum das Gerichtsurteil eine besondere Wichtigkeit für das Gewohnheitsrecht haben kann. Johannes Andreae fand seine Besonderheit in der Öffentlichkeit. Seine Ansicht dürfte sich auf die sog. scientia-Theorie beziehen, daß es zur Einführung des Gewohnheitsrechts wenigstens der Kenntnis des Gesetzgebers bedarf. Diese Theorie war besonders in der Kanonistik anerkannt, weil sie das Gewohnheitsrecht mit der ausschließlichen Gesetzgebungsgewalt des Papstes vermitteln konnte.

View full abstract

In this report, I made clear the significance of revision, focusing on penal regulations in the revision of commercial law enacted in Meiji 44, by examining the deliberations in the "Law Investigating Committee" and "The 27th Imperial Assembly".
First, in the Law Investigating Committee, the two ideas of government and bureaucracy were revealed. That is, one was an idea that, like the revision of regulations for company merger or corporate flotation, met the demands in the economic world and hastened economic growth by conquering the depression after the Russo-Japanese War, promoting post-war management, concentrating company funds and facilitating the induction of foreign capital. And another was the idea to maintain the economic order strongly restoring the trust in companies and eliminate malpractice by company directors as in the Nitto case by the intensifi-cation of penal regulations for company directors, for example a revision of the penal regulations.
And the former idea was followed with little amendment in the House of Peers, the House of Representatives and the Conference of Both Houses, but the latter was, though accepted by the House of Peers, revised substantially in the House of Representatives and the Conference of Both Houses and became a revised act because of the reflection of the fear of the economic world and Seiyu-kai that sound economic development would be disturbed.
When I consider the details, I can say that the revision of commercial law in Meiji 44 was an amendment aimed at overcoming the depression after Russo-Japanese War, promoting post-war management, centralizing company capital and making easy the induction of foreign capital, and an amendment for restoring the strong preservation of economic order by the government and judicial bureaucracy to the maintainance of eco. nomic order that was "suitable for the economic world of today."
Consequently, the combination of companies that were established after Taisho era and the concentration of funds were accelerated by, for exam. ple, the clarification of regulations for company amalgamation. And, by the revision of penal regulations, the later economic activity was led in an appropriate direction, the credit of companies was raised and the company management was made wholesome. Therefore, the revision of the commercial law in Meiji 44 has a meaning as the fundamental law for commerce and industry to redress the defects and imperfections of the commercial law in the Meiji era that was revealed after the economic growth after the Russo-Japanese War and to support the Japanese economic activity since Taisho era.

View full abstract