Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Diverse Families: A Challenge to Family Law? A Comparative Exercise

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Normativity and Diversity in Family Law

Part of the book series: Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law ((GSCL,volume 57))

  • 471 Accesses

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Namely: Iraq, Pakistan, Tunisia, UAE, Japan, South Africa, Czech Republic, Hungary, Germany, Belgium, Austria, Finland, Greece and Turkey.

  2. 2.

    See among others, Levy (2004), Hall (2011).

  3. 3.

    See i.a. Meulders-Klein (1996).

  4. 4.

    See i.a. Cadet (2005), Nichols (2012), Zuanazzi and Ruscazio (2018), Foblets (2013), Grillo (2008), Boele-Woelki et al. (2014).

  5. 5.

    See i.a. Roy (2015).

  6. 6.

    See for Europe, i.a. Grillo (2008), Wyvekens (2016).

  7. 7.

    See in this volume, Möller, United Arab Emirates, before Sect. 1.1.

  8. 8.

    Heinemann (2015), Beauchemin (2018), Çitlak et al. (2017).

  9. 9.

    See in particular, Bramadat and Koenig (2009).

  10. 10.

    See in this volume, Möller, United Arab Emirates, Sect. 2.2.

  11. 11.

    See in this volume, Alouane, Tunisia, Sect. 2.2.1.

  12. 12.

    See in this volume the Belgian report regarding the applicable divorce law, Verhellen and Wautelet, Belgium, Sect. 1 (n. 8).

  13. 13.

    Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht, Hamburg (2020).

  14. 14.

    See on that issue, Esplugues et al. (2011), Verhellen (2016), Nishitani (2017).

  15. 15.

    We collected a number of testimonies of judges, see Vetters and Foblets (2016).

  16. 16.

    See i.a. McEleavy (2011), Bonomi and Schmid (2014).

  17. 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. 18.

    For illustrations, see i.a. Berger (2013), Shah et al. (2016).

  19. 19.

    On the mahr in German courts, see Yassari (2014), p. 293ff.

  20. 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. 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. 22.

    See in this volume, Efeçınar and Ömeroǧlu, Turkey, Sect. 2.5.2.

  23. 23.

    See among others, Yassari (2017), Cobbing (2018), Marston (1997).

  24. 24.

    See Yassari (2019).

  25. 25.

    For an overview on the debates on the definition of the term ethnicity, see Hale (2004).

  26. 26.

    See in this volume, Hamoudi, Iraq, Sects. 1.1 and 1.3.3.

  27. 27.

    See in this volume, Hofmannová and Řepa, Czech Republic, Sect. 2.2.4, and Balogh et al., Hungary, Sect. 2.2.

  28. 28.

    See in this volume, Roots, Japan, Sect. 1.

  29. 29.

    See i.a. Margaria (2019).

  30. 30.

    See in this volume, Balogh et al., Hungary, Sect. 1.4.

  31. 31.

    See Dutta et al. (2017).

  32. 32.

    For recent developments on this sensitive issue, see i.a. Akhtar et al. (2020), Rutten et al. (2019).

  33. 33.

    See in this volume, Dutta, Germany, Sect. 1, and Efeçınar and Ömeroǧlu, Turkey, Sect. 1.

  34. 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. 35.

    See in this volume, Verhellen and Wautelet, Belgium, Sect. 2.1.2 (“Religious Marriages”).

  36. 36.

    See for an example of the state’s role in family law, Engelcke (2019).

  37. 37.

    See in this volume, Hamoudi, Iraq, Sect. 1.3.1.

  38. 38.

    See in this volume, Alouane, Tunisia, Sect. 1.

  39. 39.

    On interreligious family law, see Gallala-Arndt (2017).

  40. 40.

    Cf Sofianto (2016).

  41. 41.

    Cf in this volume, Ali, Pakistan, Sect. 4.1.

  42. 42.

    Cf in this volume, Möller, United Arab Emirates, Sect. 2.2.

  43. 43.

    Cf Triger (2012), De Giacometti (2019).

  44. 44.

    For example, regarding the dissolution of informal marriages in Egypt, see Alim and Yassari (2016).

  45. 45.

    See in this volume, Hofmannová and Řepa, Czech Republic, Sect. 2.1.

  46. 46.

    See in this volume, Hofmannová and Řepa, Czech Republic, Sect. 2.2.2.

  47. 47.

    See in this volume, Koumpli, Greece, Sect. 2.2.3.

  48. 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. 49.

    See in this volume, Rautenbach, South Africa, Sect. 1.

  50. 50.

    See in this volume, Ali, Pakistan, Sect. 4.4.

  51. 51.

    See in this volume, Balthasar-Wach and Engel, Austria, Sect. 2.1.1 (“Reactions and Responses, Marriage and Sexual Orientation”).

  52. 52.

    See in this volume, Roots, Japan, Sect. 2.1.2 (“Human Rights Relief Petition to JFBA and Lawsuits”).

  53. 53.

    See in this volume, Balthasar-Wach and Engel, Austria, Sect. 2.2.2.

  54. 54.

    See in this volume, Rautenbach, South Africa, Sect. 2.1.1 (“Religious Marriages”).

  55. 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauchemin C (ed) (2018) Migration between Africa and Europe. Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger MS (ed) (2013) Applying Shariʻa in the West. Leiden University Press, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Boele-Woelki K, Dethloff N, Gephart W (eds) (2014) Family law and culture in Europe – developments, challenges and opportunities. Intersentia, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonomi A, Schmid C (eds) (2014) Droit international privé de la famille – Les développements récents en Suisse et en Europe. Schulthess Verlag, Zürich

    Google Scholar 

  • Bramadat P, Koenig M (eds) (2009) International migration and the governance of religious diversity. Metropolis, Montreal

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadet F (2005) L’ordre public en droit international de la famille. Etude comparée France/Espagne. L’Harmattan, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobbing A (2018) A Victorian embarrassment: consular jurisdiction and the evils of extraterritoriality. Int Hist Rev 40(2):273–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esplugues C, Iglesias JL, Palao G (eds) (2011) Application of foreign law. Sellier Publisher, Munich

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Grillo R (ed) (2008) The family in question. Immigrant and ethnic minorities in multicultural Europe. Amsterdam University Press (Imiscoe Research), Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale HE (2004) Explaining ethnicity. Comp Pol Stud 37(4):458–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinemann T (2015) Suspect families: DNA analysis, family reunification and immigration policies. Ashgate, Farnham/Surrey

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy JT (2004) Cruelty and conflict in multiethnic politics. In: Levy JT (ed) The multiculturalism of fear. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 40–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Margaria A (2019) The construction of fatherhood – the jurisprudence of the European court of human rights. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge et al

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishitani Y (ed) (2017) Treatment of foreign law – dynamics towards convergence? Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutten S, Deogratias B, Kruiniger P (eds) (2019) Marital captivity – divorce, religion and human rights. Eleven International Publishing, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Shah P, Foblets M-C, Rohe M (eds) (2016) Family, law and religion – cultural encounters in Europe. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  • Sofianto K (2016) Mirza Ghulam Ahmad: founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim from Qadian, India. TAWARIKH: Int J Hist Stud 7(2):183–200

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verhellen J (2016) Access to foreign law in practice: easier said than done. J Priv Int Law 12(2):281–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vetters L, Foblets M-C (2016) Culture all around? Contextualising anthropological expertise in European courtroom settings. Int J Law Context 12(3):272–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyvekens A (2016) Justice familiale et migration: de la diversité culturelle à la double appartenance. Recherches Familiales 1(13):65–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yassari N (2014) Die Brautgabe im Familienvermögensrecht. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuanazzi I, Ruscazio MC (eds) (2018) Le relazioni familiari nel diritto interculturale. Libellula Edizioni, Tricase

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law, Hamburg, Germany

    Nadjma Yassari

  2. MPI for Social Anthropology, Halle, Germany

    Marie-Claire Foblets

Authors
  1. Nadjma Yassari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marie-Claire Foblets
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nadjma Yassari .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law, Hamburg, Germany

    Nadjma Yassari

  2. Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology, Halle, Germany

    Marie-Claire Foblets

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

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)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation