[IDEM libro uicensimo nono ad edictum. ] §12.1.14.prSi filius familias contra senatus consultum mutuatus pecuniam soluerit, patri nummos uindicanti nulla exceptio obicietur: sed si fuerint consumpti a creditore nummi, Marcellus ait cessare condictionem, quoniam totiens condictio datur, quotiens ex ea causa numerati sunt, ex qua actio esse potuisset, si dominium ad accipientem transisset: in proposito autem non esset.
[THE SAME, On the Edict, Book 29] If a son in power has paid money borrowed in violation of the senate's decree, no exception will be opposed to the father claiming the coins; but if the coins have been consumed by the creditor, Marcellus says that a personal action for recovery does not lie, since a personal action for recovery is granted only so often as the money has been paid on such a ground as would have allowed an action to exist, if ownership had passed to the recipient; but in the present case, there would be none.
denique per errorem soluti contra senatus consultum crediti magis est cessare repetitionem.
Consequently, where a loan made in violation of the senate's decree has been paid through error, it is more correct that the recovery of what was paid should be denied.