[ULPIANUS libro uicensimo quarto ad edictum. ] §10.4.7.prTigni appellatione omnem materiam in lege duodecim tabularum accipimus, ut quibusdam recte uidetur.
[Ulpian in the twenty-fourth book on the Edict.] By the term "beam", we understand all building materials in the Law of the Twelve Tables, as indeed some rightly believe.
§10.4.7.1Sed si rotam meam uehiculo aptaueris, teneberis ad exhibendum (et ita Pomponius scribit), quamuis tunc ciuiliter non possideas.
But if you attach my wheel to a carriage, you will be liable to an action for production (and Pomponius writes to this effect), even though you do not then possess it civilly.
§10.4.7.2Idem et si armario uel naui tabulam meam uel ansam scypho iunxeris uel emblemata phialae, uel purpuram uestimento intexeris, aut bracchium statuae coadunaueris.
The same applies if you join my plank to a chest or a ship, or a handle to a cup, or relief-work to a bowl, or weave purple thread into a garment, or join an arm to a statue.
§10.4.7.3Item municipes ad exhibendum conueniri possunt, quia facultas est restituendi: nam et possidere et usucapere eos posse constat.
Likewise, municipal citizens can be sued for production, because they have the capacity to restore; for it is well established that they can both possess and acquire by usucapion.
idem et in collegiis ceterisque corporibus dicendum erit.
The same must also be said of guilds and other corporate bodies.
§10.4.7.4Si quis non possideat litis contestatae tempore, sed postea ante sententiam possidere coeperit, oportere dici putamus debere condemnari, nisi restituat.
If anyone does not possess at the time of joinder of issue, but afterwards begins to possess before judgment, we think it ought to be held that he must be condemned unless he restores.
§10.4.7.5Si quis, cum iudicii accepit tempore possideret, postea sine dolo malo possidere desierit, absolui eum oportet: quamuis sit, inquit Pomponius, quod ei imputetur, cur non statim restituit, sed passus est secum litem contestari.
If anyone, although possessing at the time he accepted the trial, afterwards without fraud ceased to possess, he ought to be acquitted; even though, Pomponius says, there is ground for holding him responsible because he did not restore immediately but allowed issue to be joined against him.
§10.4.7.6Idem scribit, si quis litis contestatae tempore possederit, deinde desierit possidere, mox coeperit siue ex eadem causa siue ex alia, condemnari eum oportere, nisi restituat.
The same writer states that if anyone possessed at the time of joinder of issue, then ceased to possess, but soon afterwards began to possess again, whether by the same title or another, he ought to be condemned unless he restores.
§10.4.7.7Ibidem non male Pomponius iungit eius, qui ad exhibendum egit, utroque tempore interfuisse oportere rem ei restitui, hoc est et quo lis contestatur et quo fit condemnatio: et ita Labeoni placet.
In the same passage, Pomponius rightly adds that it must be to the interest of the person who brought the action for production, at both times, that is, both when issue is joined and when condemnation is pronounced, that the thing be restored to him; and this is also the opinion of Labeo.