CYIL vol. 7 (2016)

108

DALIBOR JÍLEK – JANA MICHALIČKOVÁ

CYIL 7 ȍ2016Ȏ

were subject to the jurisdiction of the private law codex during their stay in the

Zürich canton.

Provision § 2 detailed the status of both groups of individuals with differentiation

based upon citizenship of the canton

(Kantonsbürgerschaft)

. This provision stipulated

the applicable law on the legal status of both citizens and foreigners, i.e. legal

capacity and capacity to act:

Die rechtliche Eigenschaft der Kantonsbürger (Rechtsfähigkeit, Handlungsfähigkeit)

richten sich selbst im Ausland nach dem Recht ihrer Heimat.

The legal status of the Canton citizens (legal capacity, legal capacity to act) is governed

abroad by the law of their home.

The legal status of persons in the Zürich canton was governed abroad by the

law of their home

(das Recht ihrer Heimat)

. As regards personal status, the citizens

were attached to the cantonal community and its laws even when residing abroad.

Personal law followed the citizen wherever he decided to move out from the canton.

On the contrary, foreigners executed their home

(heimatliche)

rights according to the

law of the state to which they belonged. The Zürich codex relied on the principle

of exterritoriality which was used in traditional international law as a normative

exception.

Bluntschli’s commentary to the codex pointed to different legislation which was

in effect in some states. The commentary observed a principle of nationality. French

law contained in § 3 par. 3 of the Civil code was also an articulation of the principle

of nationality.

French code employed the domicile mainly in relation to family

law matters. On the contrary, other states such as Germany or the North American

states, or England, enacted either a concept of residence

(Wohnort)

or a concept of

domicile or domicile of origin, the substance of which was relatively stable. The

content of the concepts of residence and domicile did not correspond to the legal

concept of nationality.

The concepts of domicile and domicile of origin were

completely dependent on national law.

Under Mancini’s doctrine the principle of nationality took precedence over the

principle of residence or domicile. During preparatory works on Italian civil code,

BLUNTSCHLI, Johann, Caspar.

Privatrechtliches Gesetzbuch für den Kanton Zürich

Erster Band,

Personen -und Familienrecht

. Zürich: Druck und Verlag von Fr. Schulthess, 1854, p. 3-6.

Ibid

., p. 3: „Ebenso wird in dieser Hinsicht den Kantonsfremde die Anwendung ihres heimatlichen

Rechtes hierorts gewährt, wenn solches nach demRechte des Staates, dem sie angehören, vorgeschrieben

wird.“

Code civil des Francais, Édition originale et seule officielle, Paris de l’Imprimerie de La République,

1804: «Les lois concernant l’état et la capacité des personnes régissent les Français, même résidant en

pays étranger.»

BISSCHOP, Willem Roosegaarde. Nationality in International Law.

The American Journal of International

Law

, 1943, Vol. 37, No. 2, p. 320-325.