著者

山中 至

出版者

Japan Legal History Association

雑誌

法制史研究 (ISSN:04412508)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.1991, no.41, pp.1-44,en2, 1992-03-30 (Released:2009-11-16)

---

This paper analyzes the legal effect of Geishogi-contract in the early Meiji period, before the enforcement of Old Civil Law, with some unknown decisions of lower courts in Tokyo and Osaka.It contains, First, as for Geishogi-contract, dualistic opinions, labor contract as Geishogi was void against public policy but advance contract was valid, had been dominant during the Old Supreme Court era. In 1955, Supreme Court invalidated the long supported precedent with a unitary opinion and reversed it. This paper clarified, for the first time, that dualistic opinions (e. g., the decision of Tokyo court of appeals in 1878, the decision of Tokyo district court in 1879) had existed before the appearance of the decision of Old Supreme Court and that had been the main stream in lower courts.Second, while there had been the decision of Old Supreme Court in 1896 for Geishogi's freedom of retirement, similarly, we found that it had been admitted in lower courts (Tokyo and Osaka) before it. Furth-ermore, there were interesting decisions that had prohibited a master from forcing Geishogi to work and from taking back the returned. In the case of human traffic as an employment contract, lower courts had remedies for Geishogi's freedom of retirement with dualistic opinions.Third, we found, however, a progressive decision which made an advance contract void for the proclamation 295 in 1872. Finally, we should regard the decision, the substance of an adoption for Geigi was a masked Geishogi-contract and void for the proclamation 295, as the progressive one which was treated as a problem of public policy.

著者

山中 至

出版者

法制史研究

雑誌

法制史研究 (ISSN:04412508)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.1991, no.41, pp.1-44,en2, 1991

---

This paper analyzes the legal effect of Geishogi-contract in the early Meiji period, before the enforcement of Old Civil Law, with some unknown decisions of lower courts in Tokyo and Osaka.<BR>It contains, First, as for Geishogi-contract, dualistic opinions, labor contract as Geishogi was void against public policy but advance contract was valid, had been dominant during the Old Supreme Court era. In 1955, Supreme Court invalidated the long supported precedent with a unitary opinion and reversed it. This paper clarified, for the first time, that dualistic opinions (e. g., the decision of Tokyo court of appeals in 1878, the decision of Tokyo district court in 1879) had existed before the appearance of the decision of Old Supreme Court and that had been the main stream in lower courts.<BR>Second, while there had been the decision of Old Supreme Court in 1896 for Geishogi's freedom of retirement, similarly, we found that it had been admitted in lower courts (Tokyo and Osaka) before it. Furth-ermore, there were interesting decisions that had prohibited a master from forcing Geishogi to work and from taking back the returned. In the case of human traffic as an employment contract, lower courts had remedies for Geishogi's freedom of retirement with dualistic opinions.<BR>Third, we found, however, a progressive decision which made an advance contract void for the proclamation 295 in 1872. Finally, we should regard the decision, the substance of an adoption for Geigi was a masked Geishogi-contract and void for the proclamation 295, as the progressive one which was treated as a problem of public policy.