Ein Krippenplatz für jedes Kind?

Q4 Social Sciences
Verwaltung Pub Date : 2018-10-01 DOI:10.3790/VERW.51.4.523
Sonja Heitzer, D. Wolff
{"title":"Ein Krippenplatz für jedes Kind?","authors":"Sonja Heitzer, D. Wolff","doi":"10.3790/VERW.51.4.523","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract “Day-Care for every child?” Since 1 August 2013, section 24 (2) Code of Social Law VIII (Sozialgesetzbuch VIII) grants every child at the age of one and two years a legal entitlement to a place in day-care. This rather laconic piece of legislation leaves many questions unanswered, which have been approached by both jurisprudence and legal practice in the last years. This article highlights the constitutional background of institutional childcare and shows the arising conflict between the basic rights of the child and its parents on the one hand and the burden on municipal budgets on the other hand which is underlying the relevant statutes of the Code of Social Law VIII. Therefore, especially article 6 (1) of the Basic Law (Grundgesetz) is arguing for enabling childcare in the form respectively requested by the parents. On the other hand, potential risks to the constitutional principle of fiscal autonomy of municipalities (kommunale Finanzhoheit) need to be taken into account. Some of the German Laender refused to make compensational payments to the municipalities despite the extension of their tasks caused by section 24 (2) Code of Social Law VIII. This comes into conflict with the principle of related actions (Konnexitätsprinzip), as enshrined in the constitutions of the Laender. In the light of the above, the article then deals with the sub-constitutional entitlements in and surrounding section 24 (2) of the Code of Social Law VIII. Apart from the rights established by section 24 (2)Code of Social Law VIII, the entitlement to cost coverage (section 90 (3) Code of Social Law VIII), the right to repayment of expenses (section 36a (3) Code of Social Law VIII) as well as claims arising from the liability of public authorities (section 839 German Civil Code, article 34 Basic Law) are covered, discussed in the light of their constitutional background and integrated into a coherent interpretative framework.","PeriodicalId":36848,"journal":{"name":"Verwaltung","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Verwaltung","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3790/VERW.51.4.523","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract “Day-Care for every child?” Since 1 August 2013, section 24 (2) Code of Social Law VIII (Sozialgesetzbuch VIII) grants every child at the age of one and two years a legal entitlement to a place in day-care. This rather laconic piece of legislation leaves many questions unanswered, which have been approached by both jurisprudence and legal practice in the last years. This article highlights the constitutional background of institutional childcare and shows the arising conflict between the basic rights of the child and its parents on the one hand and the burden on municipal budgets on the other hand which is underlying the relevant statutes of the Code of Social Law VIII. Therefore, especially article 6 (1) of the Basic Law (Grundgesetz) is arguing for enabling childcare in the form respectively requested by the parents. On the other hand, potential risks to the constitutional principle of fiscal autonomy of municipalities (kommunale Finanzhoheit) need to be taken into account. Some of the German Laender refused to make compensational payments to the municipalities despite the extension of their tasks caused by section 24 (2) Code of Social Law VIII. This comes into conflict with the principle of related actions (Konnexitätsprinzip), as enshrined in the constitutions of the Laender. In the light of the above, the article then deals with the sub-constitutional entitlements in and surrounding section 24 (2) of the Code of Social Law VIII. Apart from the rights established by section 24 (2)Code of Social Law VIII, the entitlement to cost coverage (section 90 (3) Code of Social Law VIII), the right to repayment of expenses (section 36a (3) Code of Social Law VIII) as well as claims arising from the liability of public authorities (section 839 German Civil Code, article 34 Basic Law) are covered, discussed in the light of their constitutional background and integrated into a coherent interpretative framework.
每个孩子的托儿所?
摘要“每个孩子的日托?”自2013年8月1日起,《社会法法典》第八章(Sozialgesetzbuch VIII)第24(2)条赋予每个一岁和两岁的孩子一个日托名额的合法权利。这项相当简洁的立法留下了许多未回答的问题,过去几年来,法学和法律实践都对这些问题进行了探讨。这篇文章强调了机构儿童保育的宪法背景,并显示了儿童及其父母的基本权利与市政预算负担之间的冲突,而这正是《社会法法典》第八章相关法规的基础。因此,特别是《基本法》第6(1)条主张以父母分别要求的形式提供儿童保育服务。另一方面,需要考虑到对市政财政自治宪法原则(kommunale Finanzhoheit)的潜在风险。尽管《社会法法典》第八章第24(2)条延长了市政当局的任务,但一些德国伦德人拒绝向市政当局支付赔偿金。这与伦德宪法中规定的相关行动原则(Konnexitätsprinzip)相冲突。鉴于上述情况,本条随后讨论了《社会法法典》第八章第24(2)条及其周围的宪法规定的权利。除了《社会法法典》第八编第24(2)条规定的权利外,还包括费用保险的权利(《社会法》第八章第90(3)条)、偿还费用的权利(第八章社会法第36a(3)节)以及公共当局责任引起的索赔(《德国民法典》第839条,《基本法》第34条),根据其宪法背景进行讨论,并将其纳入一个连贯的解释框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Verwaltung
Verwaltung Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信