Recovery of Undue Legacies Paid in the Heir's Name

Notes

1. 12.6.46.pripse quidem repetere non potest — The reason why the payor himself (ipse) cannot bring a condictio for recovery is that the payment was made "in the name of the heir (heredis nomine)" and with the heir's money, meaning any potential claim belongs to the heir, and no personal claim arises for the actor.
2. 12.6.46.prdominus, ait, eos recte uindicabit — The subject of "ait" (he says) refers to Plautius, whom the author is commenting on. The owner (dominus, i.e., the heir) is said to have a claim by vindicatio (uindicabit) rather than a condictio because, since the money was delivered without the heir's consent, ownership did not pass, and thus a property-based claim (rei vindicatio) is applicable as long as the coins have not been mixed or spent.
3. 12.6.46.preadem causa rerum corporalium est — Although money (nummi) is physically a corporeal thing (res corporales), it is often treated separately in law because its ownership becomes difficult to trace once mixed or spent. This phrase confirms that the same principle applies to other corporeal things (such as specific movable property) delivered without authority, meaning the owner retains the right to bring a rei vindicatio.