Reaktionen auf Corona im japanischen und deutschen Recht

Rechtsvergleich in Zeiten der Pandemie

Abstract

The text summarizes the main results of the August 2020 conference “Reactions to Covid-19 in Japanese and German Law” and ventures an initial comparison. It became clear that there are particularly large differences in the realm of public law. While up to the conference in summer 2020, Germany experienced fewer and less drastic measures concerning exit restrictions and orders to cease operations as compared to some other countries, many of these measures were nevertheless issued in a legally binding way. In Japan, on the other hand, the government relied mainly on requests and appeals, few of which were accompanied by sanctions. In the area of the law of obligations, too, the interventions in Germany went further. While (temporary) amendments were introduced into German law for continuous obligations to overcome short-term liquidity shortages, the existing regulations in Japan have remained unchanged. Although Japanese law provides for general emergency mechanisms that could have supplemented the usual risk allocations, these were not utilized. Concerning labour law, on the other hand, the political objective was the preservation of enterprises and jobs. To this end, short-term work allowances and other support payments were provided by both states, while the legal rules on the allocation of risks have remained unaltered. Civil procedure law ultimately proved so flexible in both countries that no new regulations were introduced. However, the pandemic has highlighted existing deficits in the digitalization of the judiciary and at the same time pointed to opportunities.