The paper deals with the development of law in Czechoslovakia from its inception to the existence of the so-called First Republic, focusing in particular on the development of criminal law. The primary question addressed in the paper is whether there is legal continuity with the previous Austro-Hungarian legal system. Given that there were several legal orders in force in the aftermath of the establishment of Czechoslovakia, the next necessary question is how this situation was addressed. The paper presents examples from selected areas of criminal law, such as juvenile justice, national security laws, or military criminal norms, and intends to document the main legislative trends, namely the introduction of completely new legal regulations, the adoption of the original Austrian regulation and its nationwide application, or, last but not least, the adoption of both Austrian and Hungarian regulations with their simultaneous application. The codification attempts in the Criminal Code, which were not completed in the relevant period, have not been overlooked.

This paper concerns of the doctrine of versio in rem (or actio de in rem verso) in the legal discussion in interwar Czechoslovakia. The paper presents a brief overview of the origin and field of application of actio de in rem verso in classical Roman law and the transformation of the doctrine of versio in rem i n the frame of Corpus Iuris Civilis. The scope of the changes made by the compilers is still uncertain and was a subject of extensive discussion among the legal scholars of the 19th century. The paper describes the nature of versio in rem in the Austrian Civil Code (provision of §1041) and presents legal statements of the prominent exponents of the various legal schools of interwar Czechoslovakia, the legal traditionalists and the supporters of the School of Pure Law Theory. The doctrine of versio in rem is still in the centre of attention of the modern legal scholars in the Czech Republic. The doctrine of versio in rem was adopted in the new Czech Civil Code, but without reflecting the results of the interwar discussion.

WWI significantly influenced the development of private and trade law. The regulation of economic law institutions came up as a necessity. To protect the consumers’interests, the state interfered with private law affairs and regulated sharking procedures, unfair competition and cartel law. By taking European regulation results into account, cartel regulation organisations were introduced by the Cartel Act; the most important of them was the Cartel Court. This paper shows the most important steps of the antitrust regulation in Hungary’s special attention to the relevant European cartel regulations.

The First World War and the Trianon Treaty shocked the Hungarian economy. The Hungarian government implemented a payment moratorium from the start of the war, but after a one-year long moratorium, the government wanted to restore the working of the economy. But it desired to avoid the massive bankruptcies of the firms; therefore, a new institution, the compulsory non-bankruptcy settlement was introduced by the government in Hungary for helping the debtors. In my paper, I examine the rearrangement of the insolvency law in the interwar period which was generated by the compulsory nonbankruptcy settlement. This appeared beside the bankruptcy procedure, which regulation was passed by the National Assembly in 1881. It was the second Hungarian bankruptcy act, which remained unchanged until socialism. These two procedures were the significant elements of the insolvency law in the examined period. In my paper, I present the circumstances of the new institution’s introduction, its modification and its relation to the bankruptcy procedure.

As a result of the codification of Hungarian civil procedure, the first modern code of civil procedure was enacted in 1911. It was characterised by the principles of orality, immediacy, and publicity. An important question of the legislation was to decide to which extent should the parties be allowed to propose new allegations and proofs in the second instance proceedings. Furthermore, the legislative reforms of the interwar period amended the regulation of the appeal as well. The study examines these questions with the help of the primary sources of the era.

After regaining independence in 1918, Poland inherited five different post-partition legal orders from the 19th century, regulating personal matrimony law on its territory, i.e. Prussian, Austrian, Hungarian, Russian and Polish from the times of the Kingdom of Poland. This situation required urgent reform and taking codification steps. The codification task was entrusted to the Codification Commission, established in 1919. Its result was the governmental matrimony law Project adopted in 1929, known as Lutostański’s Project. Unfortunately, it was not passed by the Sejm. It happened because of the opposition of the Catholic Church and other conservative forces. The reasons for this state of affairs were too modern, for those times, legal solutions contained therein, and above all, the possibility of obtaining a divorce. Many legal solutions included in this project can be found in modern matrimony law, i.e. almost a hundred years later. Nevertheless, the very idea of codification and the adopted main principles of matrimony law should be considered a success of Polish legal thought. The more so because many of these solutions were used in post-war Poland in the Decree on matrimony law in 1945 and are known in contemporary matrimony law.

Jury courts existed in all the partitioning countries, and after 1918 they were to operate in all parts of the reborn Polish state. Their activities were suspended indefinitely in the former Prussian and Russian partitions. Only the former Austrian partition operated until 1938, when the Sanacja authorities liquidated them. Jury courts adjudicated only criminal cases –concerning the most severe crimes and political crimes. Recently, more attention has been devoted to jury courts and the participation of the social factor in the judiciary in Polish science, but so far, no publications in English have appeared on this subject. In the article, the author presents a short description of the jury’s activity in Poland and discusses three hypotheses about the activity of the jury in Polish science.

The article describes the regulation of liability for non-pecuniary damage on the example of 19th century Hungarian law, which is based on a long, unbroken tradition, individual legal acts and customary law. Furthermore, the classification of torts and remedies in contemporary Hungarian law is analysed, highlighting their similarities and differences to those used in the present civil law. Particular emphasis is placed on the examination and presentation of the institution of homagium, which had a medieval origin and constituted a specific instrument for obtaining compensation for non-pecuniary damage. It is compared with Polish (Code of Obligations of 1933) and Austrian (ABGB of 1811) regulations. The situation allows the author to show the variety of ways in which contract law has developed, especially concerning the pecuniary compensation of harm and pain. Employing comparative and historical methods makes it possible to highlight the timelessness of particular obligation law issues, showing its evolution in Central Europe in the last two centuries.

The creation of the Czechoslovak Republic and its legal system had its basis in the Act No. 11/1918 Coll. The Act preserved in force former Hungarian law in the territory of Slovakia. In Czech lands, former Austrian law was to be used further on. Quite understandably, attempts were present already in the interwar period to unify the legal system of Czechoslovakia. Analysis of the process and results of unification of law in Czechoslovakia reveals the participation of broad-scale of Slovak lawyers in the process and partial influence of law valid in Slovakia in the projects of new Czechoslovak codes. In the area of substantive law, the revised Austrian Civil Code (ABGB) was to become the basis of the new Czechoslovak Civil Code and therefore, not much space was left for “Slovak law”to influence the final version of the Civil Code project. In the area of procedural law, however, the codes of civil procedure valid in the Czech part and in the Slovak part of the Republic were not as different as it was the case with the substantive civil law. Therefore, the unification process was easier and many institutes of law valid in Slovakia were to be preserved in the project of the Czechoslovak Civil Procedure Code. Unfortunately, the events of the years 1938–1939 was the reason for none of the prepared projects being actually enacted. It was only after the Second World War (mostly in 1950) that the legal order was finally unified in Czechoslovakia.

The study analyses the Hungarian and Austrian adoption laws that inspired lawmakers of the Czechoslovak Act No. 56 of 1928 Coll. As the Hungarian and Austrian laws, the Czechoslovak Act of 1928 on Adoption recognised adoption as a contract to ensure an heir. It advocated compliance with the principle adoptio naturam imitatur. Therefore, it helped to improve the social and legal position of abandoned and neglected children. For lawmakers, the primary inspiration source was the Austrian General Civil Code (ABGB). Nonetheless, several provisions of the ABGB were identical with the Hungarian customary law, court practice, and office practice. Adopters had to be childless, older than forty years of age, and a minimum of eighteen years older than the adoptees. Married persons could adopt only with the consent of their spouses (in this, the influence of the ABGB was the strongest). Contrary to ABGB, but under the Hungarian court practice, was the possibility for a man to adopt his illegitimate biological child. It was possible to adopt majors as a limitation to the principle adoptio naturam imitatur. Adoption was a contractual relationship. It  established a relation only between the adopter and adoptee, while the relationships of the adoptee with the birth family continued. For instance, if the adopter failed in his duty to aliment the adoptee, the biological father had a supportive legal obligation to pay alimony. The main goal of the adoption process was to produce an heir. For this reason, we can conclude that the interests of adopters prevailed over the interests of adoptees. It changed radically after 1949, and the most important in the adoption process has become the best interest of the child.

The author reviews mental disorder as a ground for divorce in the Czechoslovak Act No. 320 of 1919 Coll. This Act was called the Marriage Amendment and was in effect for the Czech countries until 1950. The author considers the wording of the Act itself, the explanatory report, jurisprudence, and the court practice. The author compares it to the Hungarian marriage law that continued to be effective in Slovakia until 1950. It was Act No. XXXI of 1894 (the so-called Marriage Act), which regulated divorces in Slovakia, despite adopting the Czechoslovak Marriage Amendment. The Hungarian Marriage Act did not recognise mental illness as a ground for divorce. However, it was a controversial topic in both legal environments, the Hungarian and Czechoslovak.