- 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-lat1:2.14.30.pr-2.14.30.2
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-10-30
This passage discusses the validity of a son's agreement not to sue, the requirements for a stipulation with a slave to serve as a defense for the original debtor, and the applicability of an exception when a conditional stipulation fails.
[GAIUS libro primo ad edictum prouinciale.]
[GAIUS, On the Provincial Edict, book 1]
In persona tamen filii familias uidendum est, ne aliquando, et si pactus sit ne ageret, ualeat pactio:1 quia aliquando filius familias habet actionem, ueluti iniuriarum. sed cum propter iniuriam filio factam habeat et pater actionem, quin pactio filii nocitura non sit2 patri agere uolenti, dubitari non oportet.
However, in the case of a son of the family, it must be considered whether sometimes, even if he has agreed not to sue, the agreement is valid; because sometimes a son of the family has an action, for example, for injury. But since, on account of an injury done to the son, the father also has an action, there must be no doubt that the son’s agreement will not harm the father who wishes to sue.
Qui pecuniam a seruo stipulatus est, quam sibi Titius debebat, si a Titio petat, an exceptione pacti conuenti summoueri et possit et debeat, quia pactus uideatur, ne a Titio petat, quaesitum est. Iulianus ita summouendum putat, si3 stipulatori in dominum istius serui de peculio actio danda est, id est si iustam causam intercedendi seruus habuit, quia forte tantandem pecuniam Titio debuit: quod si quasi fideiussor interuenit, ex qua causa in peculium actio non daretur, non esse inhibendum creditorem, quo minus a Titio petat:4 aeque nullo modo prohiberi eum debere, si eum seruum liberum esse credidisset.
The question has been asked whether a person who has stipulated from a slave for money which Titius owed him, if he sues Titius, can and should be barred by the exception of an agreed pact, because he seems to have agreed not to sue Titius. Julian thinks that he should be barred only if an action on the peculium against the master of that slave is to be given to the stipulator, that is, if the slave had a just cause for intervening, because perhaps he owed the same amount of money to Titius; but if he intervened as if as a surety, for which cause an action on the peculium would not be given, the creditor must not be prevented from suing Titius; likewise, he should in no way be prohibited if he had believed that slave to be free.
Si sub condicione stipulatus fuerim a te quod Titius mihi pure deberet: an deficiente condicione si a Titio petam, exceptione pacti conuenti et possim et debeam summoueri? et magis est exceptionem non esse opponendam.
If I have stipulated from you under a condition for what Titius owed me unconditionally: if the condition fails and I sue Titius, can and should I be barred by the exception of an agreed pact? And the better view is that the exception should not be raised.
- 2.14.30.pruidendum est, ne aliquando ... ualeat pactio
The conjunction ne, accompanied by the impersonal expression uidendum est (it must be considered), introduces a question or doubt ("whether... not"). Thus, it means "it must be considered whether the agreement might not sometimes be valid," which is then supported by the following quia clause explaining that in certain cases (like iniuria) it indeed holds valid.
- 2.14.30.prquin pactio filii nocitura non sit
The clause introduced by quin after the negated impersonal expression dubitari non oportet (there must be no doubt) contains another negative non, resulting in a double negation that expresses strong certainty: "there is no doubt that the son's agreement will not be harmful."
- 2.14.30.1ita summouendum putat, si
The demonstrative adverb ita and the conditional clause with si correspond to express a restrictive condition ("only if", "under the condition that"). This strictly limits the situation in which Julian believes the plaintiff should be barred by the exception.
- 2.14.30.1quo minus a Titio petat
After a verb of hindering or preventing (here, the passive gerundive with negation non esse inhibendum, "must not be prevented"), the conjunction quo minus (or quominus) with the subjunctive is used to mean "from doing something" ("preventing the creditor from suing Titius").
Translated by Gemini 3.5 Flash (published 2026-07-12) · Revision history (1, latest 2026-09-21)
- 2026-09-21 AI review — translation 1