- 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-lat1:6.1.15.pr-6.1.15.3
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-12
The text discusses the scope of liability when a possessor delivers damaged property or sells it out of necessity, the handling of land assigned to soldiers, and whether the price of a deceased slave or animal must be paid based on the existence of delay.
[ULPIANUS libro sexto decimo ad edictum.]
[ULPIANUS, in the sixteenth book on the Edict.]
Item si uerberatum1 tradidit, Labeo ait etiam iniuriarum competere actionem petitori.
Likewise, if he delivered up a beaten [slave], Labeo says that an action for damages (iniuriae) is also available to the plaintiff.
Si quis rem ex necessitate distraxit, fortassis huic officio iudicis2 succurretur, ut pretium dumtaxat debeat restituere. nam et si fructus perceptos distraxit, ne corrumpantur, aeque non amplius quam pretium praestabit.
If someone sold the property out of necessity, perhaps he will be assisted by the office of the judge, so that he only ought to restore the price. For even if he sold the gathered fruits to prevent them from spoiling, he will likewise not pay anything more than the price.
Item si forte ager fuit qui petitus est et militibus adsignatus est modico honoris gratia possessori dato, an hoc restituere debeat? et puto praestaturum.
Likewise, if by chance the property claimed was land and it was assigned to soldiers, a small amount having been given to the possessor by way of gratuity, must he restore this? And I think he must make it good.
Si seruus petitus uel animal aliud demortuum sit sine dolo malo et culpa possessoris, pretium non esse praestandum plerique aiunt: sed est uerius, si forte distracturus erat petitor si accepisset, moram passo3 debere praestari: nam si ei restituisset, distraxisset et pretium esset lucratus.
If the slave claimed or another animal died without fraud or fault on the part of the possessor, most authorities say that the price does not have to be paid. But it is more correct that, if by chance the plaintiff would have sold it if he had received it, it must be paid to the one who suffered delay; for if he had restored it to him, the plaintiff would have sold it and gained the price.
- 6.1.15.pruerberatum
The participle uerberatum (beaten) is in the accusative without an explicit noun, referring contextually to the slave (seruus) who was claimed as the object.
- 6.1.15.1officio iudicis
The dative huic (to this person) is the object of the impersonal passive succurretur (relief will be given). officio iudicis is an ablative of means or cause, meaning 'by the office of the judge'.
- 6.1.15.3moram passo
The participle passo (having suffered), agreeing with the accusative noun moram (delay), is used substantively in the dative masculine, referring to 'the one who suffered the delay' (the plaintiff). It depends on the passive infinitive praestari.