Abstract
This report is based on 14 country reports namely Iraq, Pakistan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Japan, South Africa, Czech Republic, Hungary, Germany, Belgium, Austria, Finland, Greece, and Turkey. It aims at detecting the ways in which claims relating to cultural traditions, ethnic customs, religious convictions, and sexual orientation—or any other kinds of claims that are not officially accommodated in state law—are raised and dealt with in those jurisdictions. The comparison first sets family law in its historical and demographic context, including the implications of mobility and migration as well as of technological and social developments. Secondly it analyzes the actions and reactions of the entities involved, namely the legislature and the judiciary, but also civil society actors. Furthermore, it explores the reactions of the communities concerned and, finally, draws conclusions on some of the challenges that multiculturalism poses to family law today.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Namely: Iraq, Pakistan, Tunisia, UAE, Japan, South Africa, Czech Republic, Hungary, Germany, Belgium, Austria, Finland, Greece and Turkey.
- 2.
- 3.
See i.a. Meulders-Klein (1996).
- 4.
- 5.
See i.a. Roy (2015).
- 6.
- 7.
See in this volume, Möller, United Arab Emirates, before Sect. 1.1.
- 8.
- 9.
See in particular, Bramadat and Koenig (2009).
- 10.
See in this volume, Möller, United Arab Emirates, Sect. 2.2.
- 11.
See in this volume, Alouane, Tunisia, Sect. 2.2.1.
- 12.
See in this volume the Belgian report regarding the applicable divorce law, Verhellen and Wautelet, Belgium, Sect. 1 (n. 8).
- 13.
Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht, Hamburg (2020).
- 14.
- 15.
We collected a number of testimonies of judges, see Vetters and Foblets (2016).
- 16.
- 17.
Examples include among others the Rome III Regulation, the Hague Protocol, the Hague Convention on parental responsibility and protection of children and the Matrimonial regime regulation.
- 18.
- 19.
On the mahr in German courts, see Yassari (2014), p. 293ff.
- 20.
BGH 9 December 2009, BGHZ 183, p. 287 = FamRZ 2010, pp. 533, 534f; see in this volume Dutta, Germany, Sect. 2.1.2.
- 21.
See, for example, Court of First Instance (AG) of Darmstadt 15 May 2014, FamRZ 2015, pp. 408–409. The decision resembles a decision taken by the Regional Court (LG) of Cologne on 27 October 1980, IPRspr. 1980, no 83, p. 248.
- 22.
See in this volume, Efeçınar and Ömeroǧlu, Turkey, Sect. 2.5.2.
- 23.
- 24.
See Yassari (2019).
- 25.
For an overview on the debates on the definition of the term ethnicity, see Hale (2004).
- 26.
- 27.
- 28.
See in this volume, Roots, Japan, Sect. 1.
- 29.
See i.a. Margaria (2019).
- 30.
See in this volume, Balogh et al., Hungary, Sect. 1.4.
- 31.
See Dutta et al. (2017).
- 32.
- 33.
- 34.
A similar argument was made in 1958 by the Belgian Supreme Court in a case involving an informal Jewish marriage. See in this volume, Verhellen and Wautelet, Belgium, Sect. 1.
- 35.
See in this volume, Verhellen and Wautelet, Belgium, Sect. 2.1.2 (“Religious Marriages”).
- 36.
See for an example of the state’s role in family law, Engelcke (2019).
- 37.
See in this volume, Hamoudi, Iraq, Sect. 1.3.1.
- 38.
See in this volume, Alouane, Tunisia, Sect. 1.
- 39.
On interreligious family law, see Gallala-Arndt (2017).
- 40.
Cf Sofianto (2016).
- 41.
Cf in this volume, Ali, Pakistan, Sect. 4.1.
- 42.
Cf in this volume, Möller, United Arab Emirates, Sect. 2.2.
- 43.
- 44.
For example, regarding the dissolution of informal marriages in Egypt, see Alim and Yassari (2016).
- 45.
See in this volume, Hofmannová and Řepa, Czech Republic, Sect. 2.1.
- 46.
See in this volume, Hofmannová and Řepa, Czech Republic, Sect. 2.2.2.
- 47.
See in this volume, Koumpli, Greece, Sect. 2.2.3.
- 48.
The Federal Supreme Court subsequently referred the case to the German Federal Constitutional Court for possible unconstitutionality of the respective law, Yassari and Michaels (2021). As of October 2021, the case has not been decided.
- 49.
See in this volume, Rautenbach, South Africa, Sect. 1.
- 50.
See in this volume, Ali, Pakistan, Sect. 4.4.
- 51.
See in this volume, Balthasar-Wach and Engel, Austria, Sect. 2.1.1 (“Reactions and Responses, Marriage and Sexual Orientation”).
- 52.
See in this volume, Roots, Japan, Sect. 2.1.2 (“Human Rights Relief Petition to JFBA and Lawsuits”).
- 53.
See in this volume, Balthasar-Wach and Engel, Austria, Sect. 2.2.2.
- 54.
See in this volume, Rautenbach, South Africa, Sect. 2.1.1 (“Religious Marriages”).
- 55.
See in this volume, Mustasaari, Finland, Sect. 2.1.
References
Akhtar R, Nash P, Probert R (eds) (2020) Cohabitation and religious marriage. Bristol University Press, Bristol
Alim N, Yassari N (2016) Between procedure and substance – a review of law making in Egypt. In: Yassari N (ed) Changing God’s law – the dynamics of Middle Eastern family law. Islamic law in context. Routledge, London, pp 113–130
Beauchemin C (ed) (2018) Migration between Africa and Europe. Springer, Cham
Berger MS (ed) (2013) Applying Shariʻa in the West. Leiden University Press, Leiden
Boele-Woelki K, Dethloff N, Gephart W (eds) (2014) Family law and culture in Europe – developments, challenges and opportunities. Intersentia, Cambridge
Bonomi A, Schmid C (eds) (2014) Droit international privé de la famille – Les développements récents en Suisse et en Europe. Schulthess Verlag, Zürich
Bramadat P, Koenig M (eds) (2009) International migration and the governance of religious diversity. Metropolis, Montreal
Cadet F (2005) L’ordre public en droit international de la famille. Etude comparée France/Espagne. L’Harmattan, Paris
Çitlak B, Kurtenbach S, Lueneburg M et al (eds) (2017) The new diversity of family life in Europe: Mobile ethnic groups and flexible boundaries. Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Cobbing A (2018) A Victorian embarrassment: consular jurisdiction and the evils of extraterritoriality. Int Hist Rev 40(2):273–291
De Giacometti M (2019) The Island of Love. Bulletin de correspondance hellénique moderne et contemporain 1. http://journals.openedition.org/bchmc/300. Accessed 5 Jan 2021. https://doi.org/10.4000/bchmc.300
Dutta A, Schwab D, Henrich D et al (eds) (2017) Scheidung ohne Gericht? Neue Entwicklungen im europäischen Scheidungsrecht. Beiträge zum europäischen Familien- und Erbrecht, vol 18. Gieseking Verlag, Bielefeld, pp 315–336
Engelcke D (2019) Establishing filiation (nasab) and the placement of destitute children into new families: what role does the state play? J Law Relig 34(3):408–432
Esplugues C, Iglesias JL, Palao G (eds) (2011) Application of foreign law. Sellier Publisher, Munich
Foblets M-C (2013) Accommodating Islamic family law(s). A critical analysis of some recent developments and experiments throughout Europe. In: Berger MS (ed) Applying Shariʻa in the West. Leiden University Press, Leiden, pp 207–226
Gallala-Arndt I (2017) Interreligious law. In: Basedow J, Rühl G, Ferrari F et al (eds) Encyclopedia of private international law, vol 3. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 1020–1026
Grillo R (ed) (2008) The family in question. Immigrant and ethnic minorities in multicultural Europe. Amsterdam University Press (Imiscoe Research), Amsterdam
Hale HE (2004) Explaining ethnicity. Comp Pol Stud 37(4):458–485
Hall S (2011) Political belonging in a world of multiple identities. In: Baumann G, Vertovec S (eds) Multiculturalism. Critical concepts in sociology, vol 4: Crises and transformations: challenges and futures. Routledge, London, pp 151–157
Heinemann T (2015) Suspect families: DNA analysis, family reunification and immigration policies. Ashgate, Farnham/Surrey
Levy JT (2004) Cruelty and conflict in multiethnic politics. In: Levy JT (ed) The multiculturalism of fear. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 40–65
Margaria A (2019) The construction of fatherhood – the jurisprudence of the European court of human rights. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge et al
Marston G (1997) British extra-territorial jurisdiction in Japan: the case of the Ravenna and the Chishima. Br Yearb Int Law 68(1):219–245. https://doi.org/10.1093/bybil/68.1.219
Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht, Hamburg (2020) Die Frühehe im Rechtsvergleich: Praxis, Sachrecht, Kollisionsrecht. Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht 84:705–785
McEleavy P (2011) La résidence habituelle, un critère de rattachement en quête de son identité: perspectives de common law. Droit international privé: travaux du Comité français de droit international privé (2008–2010) 19:127–155
Meulders-Klein M-T (1996) Quels fondements pour la parenté? In: Steichen R, de Villers G (eds) La famille et les familles: quelle identité aujourd’hui? Academia Bruylant, Louvain-la-Neuve, pp 41–55
Nichols JA (ed) (2012) Marriage and divorce in a multicultural context, multi-tiered marriage and the boundaries of civil law and religion. Cambridge University Press, New York
Nishitani Y (ed) (2017) Treatment of foreign law – dynamics towards convergence? Springer, Cham
Roy A (2015) Pour un droit de la famille adapté aux nouvelles réalités conjugales et familiales – le rapport du Comité consultatif sur le droit de la famille. In: Barreau du Québec, Service de la formation permanente du Barreau (ed) Développements récents en droit familial. Éditions Yvon Blais, Cowansville, pp 1–18
Rutten S, Deogratias B, Kruiniger P (eds) (2019) Marital captivity – divorce, religion and human rights. Eleven International Publishing, The Hague
Shah P, Foblets M-C, Rohe M (eds) (2016) Family, law and religion – cultural encounters in Europe. Routledge, Abingdon
Sofianto K (2016) Mirza Ghulam Ahmad: founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim from Qadian, India. TAWARIKH: Int J Hist Stud 7(2):183–200
Triger Z (2012) Freedom from religion in Israel – civil marriages and cohabitation of Jews enter the rabbinical courts. Israel Stud Rev 27(2):1–17. https://doi.org/10.3167/isr.2012.270202
Verhellen J (2016) Access to foreign law in practice: easier said than done. J Priv Int Law 12(2):281–300
Vetters L, Foblets M-C (2016) Culture all around? Contextualising anthropological expertise in European courtroom settings. Int J Law Context 12(3):272–292
Wyvekens A (2016) Justice familiale et migration: de la diversité culturelle à la double appartenance. Recherches Familiales 1(13):65–77
Yassari N (2014) Die Brautgabe im Familienvermögensrecht. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen
Yassari N (2017) National report – Egypt. In: Basedow J, Rühl G, Ferrari F et al (eds) Encyclopedia of private international law, vol 3. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 2054–2061
Yassari N (2019) The relations of Iran with EU member states. In: Dutta A, Wurmnest W (eds) European private international law and member state treaties with third states – the case of the European succession regulation. Intersentia, Cambridge, pp 253–266
Yassari N, Michaels R (2021) Die Frühehe im Rechtsvergleich – Praxis, Sachrecht, Kollisionsrecht. In: Yassari N, Michaels R (eds) Die Frühehe im Recht – Praxis, Rechtsvergleich, Kollisionsrecht, höherrangiges Recht. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, pp 17–97
Zuanazzi I, Ruscazio MC (eds) (2018) Le relazioni familiari nel diritto interculturale. Libellula Edizioni, Tricase
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Yassari, N., Foblets, MC. (2022). Diverse Families: A Challenge to Family Law? A Comparative Exercise. In: Yassari, N., Foblets, MC. (eds) Normativity and Diversity in Family Law. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 57. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83106-6_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83106-6_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-83105-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-83106-6
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)