Page:Civil code of Japan compared with French (1902-05-01).pdf/2

Rh According to Art. 224 of the French Code, an authorization of the court is necessary for the wife of a minor to enter into contract or to sue in a court of law. In this case, too, we have dispensed with the interference of the courts. Our Code provides, in Art. 18, that a minor husband may, with the consent of the legal representatives, give validity to the acts of his wife.

Art. 1307 of the French Code, provides that a mere declaration by a minor, of his majority, does not prevent him from avoiding acts done under such declaration. On the other hand Art. 20 of the Japanese Code, is to the effect that if a person without legal capacity uses fraud for the purpose of causing it to be believed that he has such capacity, he is estopped from pleading his incapacity in avoidance of acts thus performed by him. The term “a person without legal capacity” is used in order to include persons other than minors.

— The principal place where a person lives is regarded as his domicile (Art. 21). This is the definition of the Japanese Code and in effect is the same as the French, viz., the domicile of every Frenchman, in regard to the exercise of his rights, is at the place where he has his principal establishment. The German Civil Code defines the domicile as the place where a person lives,. [sic]

As to the question whether a person can have several domiciles at the same time the jurisprudence of different countries indicates considerable dissimilarity. The German Civil Code expressly states that a person may have several domiciles at the same time. It is clear from the definition of domicile above cited that the Japanese Code takes the contrary view, for no person can have more than one principal place of living. Still this does not prevent a person from acquiring a special domicile for a specific purpose. The French Code presumes that a person retains his domicile until he acquires a new one. In the Japanese Code, where a person has given up his old domicile and has not yet acquired a new one, the place of residence is to be regarded as his domicile.

— In regard to persons who are absent or have disappeared, the French Code, in Art. 112 and in subsequent articles, divides absence into three periods and makes different provisions for each period. In the first period, or period of, the chief aim of the law is to protect the interests of the absentee. In the second period, or the period of, the same object is had in view, but the interests of the interested parties are also taken into consideration and would be successors are placed in possession of property left by the absentee. In the third period such possession becomes ownership. However, there is no legal presump-