← Justinian I

The Digest of Justinian

§5.1.40.pr-5.1.40.1

Discretion of Judges and Malicious Breach of Duty

Discusses the relationship between a judge's discretionary power and legal obligation, and states that a judge violates the law if they with malice omit anything contrary to legal precepts during a trial.

View ▾
View
Translation
Typeface
AI ↗
← PrevNext →

[IDEM libro quarto quaestionum.]

[THE SAME, Questions, Book IV.]

§5.1.40.pr

​Non quidquid iudicis potestati permittitur, id1 subicitur iuris necessitati.

​Not whatever is permitted to the power of a judge is subjected to the necessity of law.

§5.1.40.1

​Iudex si quid2 aduersus legis praeceptum in iudicando dolo malo3 praetermiserit, legem offendit.

​If a judge, in judging, has with malice aforethought omitted anything contrary to the precept of the law, he violates the law.

Syntax notes3 items
  1. 5.1.40.prNon quidquid ... id

    Correlation Non quidquid ... id expressing a partial negation: 'not everything which... is...'. The demonstrative pronoun id in the main clause refers back to the entire clause introduced by the relative quidquid.

  2. 5.1.40.1si quid

    The indefinite pronoun aliquid loses its prefix ali- after the conjunction si, becoming quid. It means 'if anything' in the conditional clause.

  3. 5.1.40.1dolo malo

    Ablative of manner. A standard technical term in Roman law meaning 'with malice aforethought' or 'intentionally'.

Translated by Gemini 3.5 Flash (published 2026-07-12)urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:5.1.40.pr-5.1.40.1