- Source
- Digesta Iustiniani Augusti. Mommsen, Theodor & Krueger, Paul, editors. Berlin: Weidmann, 1870.
- Translation
- AI-generated (gemini-3.5-flash) — machine translation; may contain errors
- Languages
- 日本語 · English · 简体中文 · 한국어
- CTS URN
- urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:2.14.10.pr-2.14.10.2
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-10-30
The passage discusses the interpretation of rescripts regarding whether absent or privileged creditors must follow majority agreements, the remedies available when a penalty stipulation is annexed to an agreement, and the use of the plea of fraud as a supplement to the plea of agreement.
[ULPIANUS libro quarto ad edictum.]
[ULPIANUS, On the Edict, book 4]
Rescriptum autem diui Marci sic loquitur, quasi omnes creditores debeant conuenire. quid ergo si quidam absentes sint? Num exemplum praesentium absentes sequi debeant? sed an et priuilegiariis absentibus haec pactio noceat, eleganter tractatur: si modo ualet pactio et contra absentes.1 et repeto ante formam a diuo Marco datam diuum Pium rescripsisse2 fiscum quoque in his casibus, in quibus hypothecas non habet, et ceteros priuilegiarios exemplum creditorum sequi oportere. haec enim omnia in his creditoribus, qui hypothecas non habent, conseruanda sunt.
But the rescript of the deified Marcus speaks in such a way, as if all creditors must agree. What then if some are absent? Should the absent follow the example of those present? But it is elegantly discussed whether this agreement also harms absent privileged creditors, provided that the agreement is valid also against those who are absent. And I recall that, before the rule given by the deified Marcus, the deified Pius issued a rescript that the imperial treasury as well, in those cases in which it does not have hypothecs, and other privileged creditors ought to follow the example of the creditors. For all these things must be observed in the case of those creditors who do not have hypothecs.
Si pacto subiecta sit poenae stipulatio, quaeritur, utrum pacti exceptio locum habeat an ex stipulatu actio. Sabinus putat, quod est uerius, utraque uia uti posse prout elegerit qui stipulatus est: si tamen ex causa pacti exceptione utatur, aequum erit accepto eum stipulationem ferre.3
If a stipulation for a penalty is annexed to an agreement, it is asked whether the plea of agreement has place, or the action on the stipulation. Sabinus thinks, which is more correct, that one can use either way according as the stipulator has chosen; if however he uses the plea on the ground of the agreement, it will be equitable for him to release the stipulation by formal acknowledgment of receipt.
Plerumque solemus dicere doli exceptionem subsidium esse pacti exceptionis: quosdam denique, qui exceptione pacti uti non possunt, doli exceptione usuros et Iulianus scribit et alii plerique consentiunt. ut puta si procurator meus paciscatur, exceptio doli mihi proderit, ut Trebatio uidetur, qui putat, sicuti pactum procuratoris mihi nocet, ita et prodesse,
We are generally accustomed to say that the plea of fraud is a subsidy to the plea of agreement; finally, that certain persons, who cannot use the plea of agreement, will use the plea of fraud, both Julian writes and most others agree. As for example, if my agent makes an agreement, the plea of fraud will benefit me, as it seems to Trebatius, who thinks that just as the agreement of an agent harms me, so also it benefits me,
- 2.14.10.prsi modo ualet pactio et contra absentes
The phrase "si modo" introduces a restrictive condition ("provided that", "only if"). Here it establishes the condition under which the discussion of whether the agreement harms absent privileged creditors remains relevant.
- 2.14.10.prrepeto ante formam a diuo Marco datam diuum Pium rescripsisse
The main verb "repeto" ("I recall/mention") takes the accusative with infinitive (AcI) construction with the subject accusative "diuum Pium" and the infinitive "rescripsisse". The phrase "ante formam... datam" is a prepositional phrase expressing temporal precedence.
- 2.14.10.1accepto eum stipulationem ferre
The legal idiom "accepto ferre" (or "acceptum ferre") means to enter as received in the ledger, or formally discharge an obligation (stipulatio) by means of a formal release ("acceptilatio").