- 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-lat1:4.3.40.pr
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-08
This section explains that anyone who deceives another into accepting a disadvantageous inheritance is liable for fraud, except when the deceiver is the sole creditor, in which case a defense of fraud is sufficient.
[FURIUS ANTHIANUS libro primo ad edictum.]
[FURIUS ANTHIANUS, in the first book on the Edict.]
Is, qui decepit aliquem, ut hereditatem non idoneam adiret,1 de dolo tenebitur, nisi fortasse ipse creditor erat et solus erat: tunc enim sufficit contra eum doli mali exceptio.2
He who has deceived someone into accepting an unsuitable inheritance will be held liable for fraud, unless perhaps he himself was a creditor and the only one; for in that case, the defense of fraud is sufficient against him.
- 4.3.40.prut hereditatem non idoneam adiret
The ut-clause with the imperfect subjunctive adiret expresses the result or purpose of the action of decepit (deceived). The phrase non idoneam (unsuitable) refers to an estate that is insolvent or otherwise disadvantageous to the heir.
- 4.3.40.prsufficit contra eum doli mali exceptio
If the deceiver is the sole creditor, the heir does not need to actively bring an action for fraud (actio de dolo); instead, it is sufficient to raise the defense of fraud (exceptio doli) in response to the creditor's claim, making the active action unnecessary.