[ULPIANUS libro uicensimo quarto ad edictum. ] §11.6.3.prSi duobus mandauero et ambo dolose fecerint, aduersus singulos in solidum agi poterit, sed altero conuento, si satisfecerit, in alterum actionem denegari oportebit.
[ULPIAN, from the twenty-fourth book on the Edict.] If I commission two persons and both act with bad faith, an action can be brought against each of them for the whole amount; but if one has been sued and has made satisfaction, the action against the other must be denied.
§11.6.3.1Competit autem haec actio ei, cuius interfuit falsum modum renuntiatum non esse, hoc est uel emptori uel uenditori, cui renuntiatio offuit.
This action is available to the person who had an interest in the false measurement not being reported, that is, to either the buyer or the seller whom the report harmed.
§11.6.3.2Pomponius tamen scribit, si emptor plus dederit propter renuntiationem, quia condicre potest quod plum dedit, agi cum mensore non posse: nihil enim emptoris interesse, cum possit condicere: nisi soluendo uenditor non fuit: tunc enim mensor tenebitur.
Pomponius, however, writes that if the buyer paid more on account of the report, because he can bring an action for recovery of what he paid in excess, an action cannot be brought against the surveyor; for it is of no interest to the buyer when he can bring an action for recovery; unless the seller was insolvent, for then the surveyor will be held liable.
§11.6.3.3Sed si uenditor maiorem modum tradiderit fraudatus a mensore, consequenter dicit Pomponius non esse actionem aduersus mensorem, quia est ex uendito actio aduersus emptorem, nisi et hic emptor soluendo non sit.
But if the seller, having been defrauded by the surveyor, delivered a larger measure, Pomponius consequently says that there is no action against the surveyor, because there is an action from sale against the buyer, unless this buyer also is insolvent.
§11.6.3.4Idem Pomponius scribit, si propter iudicium adhibitus mensor fraudauerit me in renuntiatione, teneri eum, si ob hoc de iudicio minus tuli: plane si a iudice adhibitus contra me renuntiauerit dolo malo, dubitat, an teneri mihi debeat? quod magis admittit.
The same Pomponius writes that if a surveyor employed for the purpose of a trial defrauded me in his report, and if because of this I recovered less from the trial, he is held liable; clearly, if a surveyor employed by the judge reported against me with bad faith, he doubts whether he ought to be held liable to me, but he rather admits this.
§11.6.3.5Hanc actionem heredi similibusque personis dandam Pomponius scribit: sed in heredem similesque personas denegandam ait.
Pomponius writes that this action should be granted to the heir and similar persons, but should be denied against the heir and similar persons.
§11.6.3.6Serui autem nomine magis noxale quam de peculio competere ait, quamuis ciuilis actio de peculio competat.
On account of a slave, however, he says that a noxal action is available rather than an action concerning the peculium, although a civil action concerning the peculium is available.