Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §12.4.6.pr

Title to Dowry Recovery When Marriage Fails

Passage 1956 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This text discusses the ownership of the action for recovery (condictio) of a dowry when a stranger or a father provided it with a return agreement upon the termination of marriage, but the marriage was never contracted, arguing that the giver is presumed to have looked out for his own interest.

[IDEM libro tertio disputationum. ] §12.4.6.prSi extraneus pro muliere dotem dedisset et pactus esset, ut, quoquo modo finitum esset matrimonium, dos ei redderetur, nec fuerint nuptiae secutae, quia de his casibus solummodo fuit conuentum qui matrimonium sequuntur, nuptiae autem secutae non sint, quaerendum erit, utrum mulieri condictio an ei qui dotem dedit competat.
[THE SAME, Third Book of Disputations.] If a stranger had given a dowry for a woman and had agreed that, in whatever way the marriage should end, the dowry should be returned to him, and the marriage did not follow; since agreement was made only concerning those cases which follow marriage, but the marriage has not followed, it will have to be asked whether the condictio belongs to the woman or to him who gave the dowry.
et uerisimile est in hunc quoque casum eum qui dat sibi prospicere: nam quasi causa non secuta habere potest condictionem, qui ob matrimonium dedit, matrimonio non copulato, nisi forte euidentissimis probationibus mulier ostenderit hoc eum ideo fecisse, ut ipsi magis mulieri quam sibi prospiceret.
And it is probable that also for this case he who gives is looking out for himself; for since the marriage was not contracted, he who gave on account of marriage can have the condictio as if for a cause which did not follow, unless by chance the woman should show by the clearest proofs that he did this for the purpose of looking out for the woman herself rather than for himself.
sed et si pater pro filia det et ita conuenit, nisi euidenter aliud actum sit, condictionem patri competere Marcellus ait.
But Marcellus says that also if a father should give for his daughter and such an agreement is made, the condictio belongs to the father, unless it is clearly shown that something else was intended.

Notes

  1. §12.4.6.prquia de his casibus solummodo fuit conuentum qui matrimonium sequuntur, nuptiae autem secutae non sint — This part explains why the initial agreement (pactus esset...) cannot be directly applied to a case where the marriage itself was not contracted, since that agreement only contemplated the termination of the marriage, which is an event following the contraction of marriage.
  2. §12.4.6.prquasi causa non secuta — Meaning "as if for a cause which did not follow." It points to the legal basis of the action for recovery based on the failure of the purpose of the performance (the contraction of marriage), corresponding to the "condictio ob rem dati" or "condictio causa data causa non secuta."

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §12.4.6.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:12.4.6.pr

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.