Separate Residence of Spouses under the German Civil Code and the Russian Law of 1914: Similarities and Differences

This paper examines the question of foreign influence on the 1898 draft law concerning the separate residence of spouses in the Russian Empire, prepared by the Editorial Commission for the Compilation of the Civil Code. The draft was ultimately rejected following accusations by the Ober-Procurator of the Holy Synod, K. P. Pobedonostsev, of uncritical adoption of a foreign legal institution. The author argues that this charge was not rooted in a genuine concern over foreign borrowing, but rather reflected the ecclesiastical administration’s unwillingness to allow the establishment of a secular alternative to ecclesiastical divorce. Through a comparison  of the texts of the draft of the German Civil Code and the Russian law dated 12 March 1914, approved by the Holy Synod, the author demonstrates that in the final version of the Russian law, the borrowing from German legislative material is manifested far more explicitly. This is evidenced by textual coincidences in the list of grounds for permitting the rejection of a request by one spouse to restore cohabitation. 

1. Veremenko V. A. «Semeynye nesoglasiya» i razdelnoe zhitelstvo suprugov: problema zakonodatelnogo regulirovaniya v Rossii vo vtoroy polovine XIX — nachale XX v. // Dialog so vremenem. — 2007. — № 18. — S. 328–352.

2. Grazhdanskoe ulozhenie. Kniga vtoraya. Semeystvennoe pravo: proekt Vysochayshe uchrezhdennoy Redaktsionnoy Komissii po sostavleniyu Grazhdanskogo ulozheniya. Tom pervyy. St. 1–349 s obyasneniyami. — SPb., 1902. — 655 s.

3. Grigorovskiy S. P. O razvode. Prichiny i posledstviya razvoda i brakorazvodnoe sudoproizvodstvo: Istorikoyuridicheskie ocherki. — SPb., 1911. — 342 s.

4. Ludmer Ya. Babi stony (iz zametok mirovogo sudi) // Yuridicheskiy vestnik. — 1884. — T. 15. — № 4 (aprel). — S. 447–467.

5. Pakhman S. V. Obychnoe grazhdanskoe pravo v Rossii / pod red. i s predisl. V. A. Tomsinova. — M.: Zertsalo, 2003. — 736 s.

6. Polyanskiy P. L. Deyatelnost III otdeleniya po razresheniyu supruzheskikh konfliktov // Gosudarstvo i pravo. — 2025. — № 4. — S. 198–208.

7. Polyanskiy P. L. Semeyno-pravovye posledstviya zhestokogo obrashcheniya s zhenami u podatnogo naseleniya Rossii v seredine XIX v. // Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo oblastnogo universiteta. Seriya «Yurisprudentsiya». — 2022. — № 3. — S. 51–66.

8. Fleyshits E. A. Novella semeystvennogo prava // Pravo. — 1914. — № 14. — S. 1113–1129.

9. Freeze G. L. Bringing Order to the Russian Family: Marriage and Divorce in Imperial Russia, 1760–1860 // The Journal of Modern History. — 1990. — Vol. 62. — No. 4. — P. 708–746.

10. Motive zu dem Entwurfe eines Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuches für das Deutsche Reich. Bd 4: Familienrecht. — Berlin, Leipzig, 1888. — 1274 S.

11. Raјiћ M. Pregled istoriјskog razvoјa evropske kodifikatsiјe graђanskog prava // Evropsko zakonodavstvo. — 2022. — № 79. — S. 23–44.

12. Toop H. Ehescheidung und Aufhebung der ehelichen Gemeinschaft nach dem Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch: Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde… — Jena; Borna; Leipzig. — 1908. — 56 S