- 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-lat1:8.1.20.pr
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-14
On the purchase of a right of way or other land servitude, Labeo holds that security against hindrance must be given because incorporeal rights cannot be physically delivered, whereas Javolenus argues that the exercise of such rights should be treated as equivalent to the delivery of possession, justifying possessory-like interdicts.
[IAUOLENUS libro quinto ex posterioribus Labeonis.]
[JAVOLENUS in the fifth book of his Epitomes of Labeo’s Posterior Works.]
Quotiens uia aut aliquid ius fundi emeretur, cauendum putat esse Labeo per te non fieri, quo minus eo iure uti possit,1 quia nulla eiusmodi iuris uacua traditio2 esset. ego puto usum eius iuris pro traditione possessionis accipiendum esse3 ideoque et interdicta ueluti possessoria constituta sunt.
Whenever a right of way or some other right of land is purchased, Labeo thinks that security should be given that it will not be due to you that he is prevented from using that right, because there is no vacant delivery of a right of this kind. I think that the use of that right should be accepted in place of the delivery of possession, and therefore interdicts, as if for possession, have also been established.
- 8.1.20.prcauendum... per te non fieri, quo minus eo iure uti possit
cauendum is the gerundive of cauere (to give security, guarantee), indicating the obligation to provide a contractual stipulation (cautio). per te non fieri means "that it does not occur through you (the seller)", and the quo minus clause ("lest he be unable to use that right") expresses the prevention of hindrance. Since an incorporeal right cannot be physically delivered, the seller must guarantee that they will not obstruct its future exercise.
- 8.1.20.pruacua traditio
This means "vacant delivery" or "unencumbered transfer". Labeo holds that an incorporeal thing (res incorporalis) such as a servitude cannot be the object of physical delivery (traditio) that transfers possession, which he expresses as nulla uacua traditio (no vacant delivery exists).
- 8.1.20.prusum eius iuris pro traditione possessionis accipiendum esse
Javolenus's own view. In contrast to Labeo, who denied the physical delivery of incorporeal rights, Javolenus argues that the factual exercise (usus) of the right should be treated as equivalent to the delivery of possession (pro traditione) (constituting what later jurists called "quasi-possession"), thereby providing the legal basis for extending possessory-like interdictal protection.