Repetition of Lost Usufruct and Right of Accrual — Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian Book 7 (7.4.3.pr–7.4.3.3), Latin & English

[ULPIANUS libro septimo decimo ad Sabinum.]

[ULPIANUS from the seventeenth book on Sabinus.]

§7.4.3.pr

Sicut in annos singulos usus fructus legari potest, ita et capitis minutione amissus¹ legari potest, ut adiciatur: 'quotiensque capite minutus erit, ei lego', uel sic 'quotiens amissus erit': et tunc, si capitis minutione amittatur, repetitus uidebitur. unde tractatum est, si cui quamdiu uiuat usus fructus legatus sit, an uideatur repetitus,² quotiens amissus est? quod et Maecianus temptat: et puto repetitum uideri. quare si usque ad tempus sit legatus, ut puta usque ad decennium, idem erit dicendum.

Just as a usufruct can be bequeathed for individual years, so also it can be bequeathed as lost by deminution of status, so that there is added: ‘and as often as he undergoes deminution of status, I bequeath it to him’, or thus ‘as often as it is lost’: and then, if it is lost by deminution of status, it will be regarded as repeated. Hence it has been discussed whether, if a usufruct is bequeathed to someone for as long as he lives, it is regarded as repeated as often as it is lost. Which Maecianus also supports: and I think it is to be regarded as repeated. Therefore, if it is bequeathed up to a certain time, as for example up to ten years, the same must be said.

§7.4.3.1

Haec autem repetitio, quae fit post amissum capitis minutione usum fructum, quaeritur an et ius adcrescendi secum saluum habeat: ut puta Titio et Maeuio usus fructus legatus est et, si Titius capite minutus esset, eidem usum fructum legauit: quaesitum est, si Titius ex repetitione usum fructum haberet, an inter eos ius adcrescendi saluum esset. et Papinianus libro septimo decimo quaestionum scribit saluum esse, perinde ac si alius esset Titio in usu fructu substitutus:³ hos enim tametsi non uerbis, re tamen coniunctos uideri.

Now it is asked whether this repetition, which occurs after a usufruct is lost by deminution of status, also preserves the right of accrual with it: for instance, a usufruct was bequeathed to Titius and Maevius, and the testator bequeathed the usufruct to the same Titius if he should undergo deminution of status: it was asked whether, if Titius held the usufruct by virtue of the repetition, the right of accrual between them remained intact. And Papinianus writes in the seventeenth book of questions that it remains intact, just as if another person had been substituted for Titius in the usufruct: for they seem to be joined, if not in words, yet in reality.

§7.4.3.2

Idem Papinianus quaerit, si Titio et Maeuio usu fructu legato in repetitione usus fructus non totum, sed partem⁴ Titio relegasset, an uiderentur coniuncti. et ait, si quidem Titius amiserit, totum socio adcrescere: quod si Maeuius amisisset, non totum adcrescere, sed partem ad eum, partem ad proprietatem redire. quae sententia habet rationem: neque enim potest dici eo momento, quo quis amittit usum fructum et resumit, etiam ipsi quicquam ex usu fructu adcrescere: placet enim nobis ei qui amittit usum fructum ex eo quod amittit nihil adcrescere.

The same Papinianus asks whether, if a usufruct had been bequeathed to Titius and Maevius, and in the repetition of the usufruct the testator had bequeathed to Titius not the whole, but a part, they would be regarded as joined. And he says that if indeed Titius has lost it, the whole accrues to his partner; but if Maevius had lost it, the whole does not accrue, but a part returns to him, and a part to the ownership. This opinion is rational: for it cannot be said that at that moment when one loses the usufruct and resumes it, anything of the usufruct accrues to him too; for it is our accepted rule that to him who loses a usufruct, nothing accrues from what he loses.

§7.4.3.3

Morte quoque amitti usum fructum non recipit dubitationem, cum ius fruendi morte extinguatur, sicuti si quid aliud,⁵ quod personae cohaeret.

That a usufruct is also lost by death does not admit of doubt, since the right of enjoying is extinguished by death, just as anything else that is inherent in the person.

Syntax notes5 items

7.4.3.prcapitis minutione amissus
amissus is a perfect passive participle agreeing with the preceding usus fructus. Semantically, it functions to express the event itself, i.e., 'the loss of the usufruct by deminution of status' (similar to the ab urbe condita construction).
7.4.3.pran uideatur repetitus
The an clause introduces an indirect question that functions as the subject of the impersonally used passive verb tractatum est. repetitus is a predicate nominative.
7.4.3.1perinde ac si alius esset Titio in usu fructu substitutus
perinde ac si ('just as if') introduces a counterfactual conditional clause, taking the imperfect subjunctive esset. The dative Titio depends on substitutus ('substituted for Titius').
7.4.3.2non totum, sed partem
These are accusatives within the conditional clause si ... relegasset. In context, they refer to the share of the usufruct being re-bequeathed (relegat), and both totum and partem function as direct objects of relegasset.
7.4.3.3quid aliud
This is the indefinite pronoun aliquid with the prefix ali- dropped after the conjunction si, resulting in quid.

Translated by Gemini 3.5 Flash (published 2026-07-12) · Revision history (1, latest 2026-09-22)

2026-09-22 AI review — source 1

urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:7.4.3.pr-7.4.3.3