Türk-Alman Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi
Yazarlar: Karen KLEIN
Konular:Hukuk
Anahtar Kelimeler:De falsa demonstratio non nocet,False description,Haakjöringsköd,Reichsgericht,Interpretation of declarations of intent
Özet: deIn the year 1920, the Supreme Court of the German Reich (Reichsgericht) had to decide on a case which was going to be famous under the name “Haakjöringsköd”. This case developed into one of the leading cases regarding declarations of intent and their interpretation. Even 100 years after, the case is still mentioned in many legal textbooks on the General Part (i.e. Book 1) of the German Civil Code (BGB) in order to demonstrate a rule called falsa demonstratio non nocet. According to that rule, what parties stated is void if their intentions are identical to each other yet different than their declarations; a sentence which is often summed up with the phrase “a false description does not vitiate”. At first glance, this rule seems obvious. Nevertheless, the specific impacts of the Haakjöringsköd case can only be understood if its historical background is taken into consideration. Accordingly, the rule falsa demonstratio non nocet can only be comprehended if it is located within the theory of legal transactions and particularly within the theory of interpretation of declarations of intent. It is also important to scrutinize the legal practice in order to determine in which cases German courts apply the falsa demonstratio non nocet rule.