called the privatisation of private law. 4 I 2 Integration functionalism The ordo-liberal assignment of constitutional valid ity to the system of undistorted competition' was never dominating, certainly not beyond German borders. On the one hand the normative yardstick it provided seemed simply to narrow to provide guidance for the broad range of activities in which the European Economic Community was involved. Equally in the legal disciplines which started to explore the nature of that new phenomenon. That is certainly true for international law. 5 But even in German constitutional law (law of the state, Staatsrecht), the economic policy was widely held to be the responsibility of the democratically elected -government. This exactly was the challenge for the new discipline since this type of legitimacy, i.e., one based on a parliamentary majority, was not available for supranational political governance, it became imperative to find an alternative basis for gitimising supranational governance. Hans Peter Ipsen succeeded in developing a particularly interesting response. He characterised the(then) three European Communities special purpose associations for functional integration'(Zweckverbande funktioneller Integration). 6 The term special purpose associations' denoted areas not foreseen in the ordo-liberal concepts-without, however, exposing Community law to democratic requirements. As a special purpose association, Europe was supposed to deal with questions of technical realisation, i.e., administrative tasks that could -and had to- be conveyed to a supranational bureaucracy. 7 That all this has to do with private law may seem a far-fetched assertion, but it is raps, easier to understand if one bears in mind that Ipsen's functionalism was a continuation at the European level of the second trad ition in German economic law, which K W. Norr has called the concept of organised economy 8 This trad ition is agnostic as to Gemeinschaft, Baden-Baden: Nomos 1993, 485 ff. ee the programmatic title of the September 2002 Heidelberg conference of the German Association of Junger Zivilrechtswissenschafiler 2002 (Die Privatsierung des privatrechts-rechtliche Gestaltung ohp uch youngteachersofcivillawshttp:/www.iunge.zivilrechtswissenschaftler.de>,recentlypublishedasJAht staatlichen Zwang), Stuttgart [etc ] Boorberg 2003. Another school of thought, represented first and foremost by Reinhard Zimmermann, conceptualises private law as an autonomous body of la w freeing itself from national ties(and finding the way back to the ius commune europaeum); cf R Zimmermann, Das Romisch-Kanonische lus commune als Grundlage europaischer Rechtseinheit, Juristen Zeitung 1992, 8 ff.; Der Europaische Charakter des englischen Rechts. Historische Verbindungen zwischen civil law und common law, Zeitschriftfir Europaisches Privatrecht 1993, 4 ff.(reprinted in P -Ch. Muller-Graff(ed. ) Gemeinsames Privatrecht in der Europaischen Gemeinschaft, 2nd edn., Baden-Baden: Nomos 1999, 103 ff. ) see, also, id, Roman Lawand European Legal Unity, in: A.S. Hartkamp, M.W. Hesselink, E. Hondius, C Joustra and E du Perron(eds ) Towards a European Civil Code, 2nd edn., Nijmegen/Den Haag. Kluwer 1998, 21 ff, and id, Savignys Vermachtnis, in: P. Caropni andG Dilcher (eds ) Norm und Tradition. Welche Geschichtlichkeitfuirdie Rechtsgeschichte?, Koln/Weimarwien: Bohlau 1998, 281 ff. 15 For an instructive account of the legal history, see Ch. Tietje, Internationalisiertes venwaltung shandeln Berlin: Duncker Hum blot 2001. 50 ff. 86 ff.155 ff. 16 H.P. Ipsen, Der deutsche Jurist und das Europa ische Gemeinschaftsrecht, Verhandlungen des 43 Deutschen uristentages, Munchen: C H. Beck 1964, Vol. 2 L 14 ff. H P. Ipsen, Europaisches Gemeinschaftsrecht, Tubingen: Mohr/Siebeck 1972, 176 ff. K.W. Norr, Die Republikder Wirtschaft, Teil: Von der Besatzungszeit bis =ur GroBen Koalitioncalled the ‘privatisation of private law’.14 I.2 Integration functionalism The ordo-liberal assignment of constitutional validity to the ‘system of undistorted competition’ was never dominating, certainly not beyond German borders. On the one hand, the normative yardstick it provided seemed simply to narrow to provide guidance for the broad range of activities in which the European Economic Community was involved. Equally important, the idea of an ‘economic constitution’ was not accepted, or was simply unheard of, in the legal disciplines which started to explore the ‘nature’ of that new phenomenon. That is certainly true for international law.15 But even in German constitutional law (law of the state, Staatsrecht), the economic policy was widely held to be the responsibility of the - democratically elected - government. This exactly was the challenge for the new discipline: since this type of legitimacy, i.e., one based on a parliamentary majority, was not available for supranational political governance, it became imperative to find an alternative basis for legitimising supranational governance. Hans Peter Ipsen succeeded in developing a particularly interesting response. He characterised the (then) three European Communities as ‘special purpose associations for functional integration’ (Zweckverbände funktioneller Integration).16 The term ‘special purpose associations’ denoted areas not foreseen in the ordo-liberal concepts - without, however, exposing Community law to democratic requirements. As a special purpose association, Europe was supposed to deal with questions of ‘technical realisation’, i.e., administrative tasks that could - and had to - be conveyed to a supranational bureaucracy.17 That all this has to do with private law may seem a far-fetched assertion, but it is, perhaps, easier to understand if one bears in mind that Ipsen’s functionalism was a continuation at the European level of the second tradition in German economic law, which K.W. Nörr has called the concept of ‘organised economy’.18 This tradition is agnostic as to Gemeinschaft, Baden-Baden: Nomos 1993, 485 ff. 14 See the programmatic title of the September 2002 Heidelberg conference of the German Association of young teachers of civil law, <http://www.junge.zivilrechtswissenschaftler.de>, recently published as Jahrbuch Junger Zivilrechtswissenschaftler 2002 (Die Privatsierung des Privatrechts - rechtliche Gestaltung ohne staatlichen Zwang), Stuttgart [etc.]: Boorberg 2003. Another school of thought, represented first and foremost by Reinhard Zimmermann, conceptualises private law as an autonomous body of law freeing itself from national ties (and finding the way back to the ius commune europaeum); cf. R. Zimmermann, Das Römisch-Kanonische Ius commune als Grundlage europäischer Rechtseinheit, Juristen Zeitung 1992, 8 ff.; Der Europäische Charakter des englischen Rechts. Historische Verbindungen zwischen civil law und common law, Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht 1993, 4 ff. (reprinted in P.-Ch. Müller-Graff (ed.), Gemeinsames Privatrecht in der Europäischen Gemeinschaft, 2nd edn., Baden-Baden: Nomos 1999, 103 ff.); see, also, id., Roman Law and European Legal Unity, in: A.S. Hartkamp, M.W. Hesselink, E. Hondius, C. Joustra and E. du Perron (eds.), Towards a European Civil Code, 2nd edn., Nijmegen/Den Haag: Kluwer 1998, 21 ff., and id., Savignys Vermächtnis, in: P. Caropni and G. Dilcher (eds.), Norm und Tradition. Welche Geschichtlichkeit für die Rechtsgeschichte?, Köln/Weimar/Wien: Böhlau 1998, 281 ff. 15 For an instructive account of the legal history, see Ch. Tietje, Internationalisiertes Verwaltungshandeln, Berlin: Duncker & Humblot 2001, 50 ff., 86 ff., 155 ff. 16 H.P. Ipsen, Der deutsche Jurist und das Europäische Gemeinschaftsrecht, Verhandlungen des 43. Deutschen Juristentages, München: C.H. Beck 1964, Vol. 2 L 14 ff. 17 H.P. Ipsen, Europäisches Gemeinschaftsrecht, Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck 1972, 176 ff. 18 K.W. Nörr, Die Republik der Wirtschaft, Teil I: Von der Besatzungszeit bis zur Großen Koalition