[ULPIANUS libro septuagensimo quarto ad edictum. ] §2.11.2.prNon exigimus reum iudicio sisti, si negotium, propter quod iudicio sisti promisit, fuerit transactum: sed hoc ita, si prius id negotium transactum sit, quam sisti oporteret.
[ULPIANUS, in the seventy-fourth book on the Edict.] We do not require the defendant to appear in court, if the business on account of which he promised to appear has been settled; but this is so only if that business was settled before he was required to appear.
ceterum si postea transactum est, exceptio doli opponi debet: quis enim de poena promissa laborat post negotium transactum? cum etiam transacti negotii exceptionem putauerit quis nocere, quasi etiam de poena transactum sit, nisi contrarium specialiter partibus placuerit.
But if it was settled afterwards, the plea of fraud must be opposed; for who worries about a promised penalty after the business has been settled? Since one would think that the plea of a settled business also bars the action, as if the penalty had also been settled, unless the contrary was specifically agreed upon by the parties.
§2.11.2.1Si quis municipalis muneris causa sine suo dolo malo impeditus in iudicio secundum suam promissionem non stetit, aequissimum est tribui ei exceptionem.
If anyone, being hindered on account of a municipal duty without any malicious intent of his own, has not appeared in court according to his promise, it is most equitable that a plea be granted to him.
§2.11.2.2Simili modo et si ad testimonium desideratus ad iudicium occurrere non potuit, erit ei subueniendum.
In like manner, if someone who was required for testimony could not come to court, he must be assisted.
§2.11.2.3Si quis iudicio se sisti promiserit et ualetudine uel tempestate uel ui fluminis prohibitus se sistere non possit, exceptione adiuuatur, nec immerito.
If anyone has promised to appear in court and, being prevented by illness, a storm, or the violence of a river, cannot appear, he is assisted by a plea, and not without reason.
cum enim in tali promissione praesentia opus sit, quemadmodum potuit se sistere qui aduersa ualetudine impeditus est? et ideo etiam lex duodecim tabularum, si iudex uel alteruter ex litigatoribus morbo sontico impediatur, iubet diem iudicii esse diffisum.
For since presence is necessary in such a promise, how could he appear who was hindered by ill health? And for this reason even the Law of the Twelve Tables orders the trial day to be postponed if either the judge or one of the litigants is hindered by a serious illness.
§2.11.2.4Si non propter ualetudinem mulier non steterit iudicio, sed quod grauida erat, exceptionem ei dandam Labeo ait: si tamen post partum decubuerit, probandum erit quasi ualetudine impeditam.
If a woman has not appeared in court, not on account of ill health, but because she was pregnant, Labeo says that a plea must be given to her; but if she was confined after childbirth, it must be approved as if she was hindered by ill health.
§2.11.2.5Idem est et si quis furere coeperit: nam qui furore impeditur, ualetudine impeditur.
The same is true if anyone begins to lose his mind; for he who is hindered by madness is hindered by ill health.
§2.11.2.6Quod diximus succurri etiam ei, qui tempestate aut ui fluminis prohibitus non uenit, tempestatem sic intellegere debemus, siue maritima siue terrestris sit.
As to our statement that assistance is also given to him who, being prevented by a storm or the violence of a river, has not come, we must understand storm in this way, whether it be at sea or on land.
Tempestatem intellegere debemus talem, quae impedimento sit itineri uel nauigationi.
We must understand a storm to be such as to be an impediment to travel or navigation.
§2.11.2.7Uis fluminis etiam sine tempestate accipienda est: uim fluminis intellegimus, et si magnitudo eius impedimento sit siue pons solutus sit uel nauigium non stet.
The violence of a river must be accepted even without a storm; we understand the violence of a river to include cases where its size is an impediment, or a bridge is broken down, or a ferry boat is not operating.
§2.11.2.8Si quis tamen cum posset non incidere in tempestatem uel in fluminis uim, si ante profectus esset uel tempore oportuno nauigasset, ipse se artauerit: numquid exceptio ei minime prosit? quod quidem causa cognita erit statuendum.
But if anyone, although he could have avoided falling into a storm or the violence of a river if he had set out earlier or sailed at an opportune time, has constrained himself, would the plea be of no benefit to him?
nam neque sic artandus sit, ut possit ei dici, cur non multo ante profectus est quam dies promissionis ueniret: neque iterum permittendum ei, si quid sit quod ei imputetur, causari tempestatem uel uim fluminis.
This must indeed be decided after a hearing of the case. For he should not be so constrained that it can be said to him: 'Why did you not set out long before the day of the promise arrived?' Nor, on the other hand, if there is anything that can be imputed to him, should he be permitted to make an excuse of a storm or the violence of a river.
quid enim si quis, cum Romae esset ipso tempore promissionis sistendi, nulla necessitate urguente uoluptatis causa in municipium profectus sit? nonne indignus est, cui haec exceptio patrocinetur? aut quid si tempestas quidem in mari fuit, terra autem iste potuit uenire: uel flumen circumire? aeque dicendum non semper ei exceptionem prodesse: nisi angustiae non patiebantur terra iter metiri uel circumire.
For what if someone, being in Rome at the very time of the promise to appear, set out for a municipality for the sake of pleasure when no necessity urged him? Is he not unworthy of being protected by this plea? Or what if there was indeed a storm at sea, but he could have come by land or gone around the river? It must likewise be said that the plea does not always benefit him, unless the narrowness of time did not permit him to travel by land or go around.
cum tamen uel flumen sic abundasset, ut implesset omnem locum, in quo sisti oportuit, uel aliqua fortuita calamitas eundem locum euertit uel praesentiam uenienti periculosam fecit, ex bono et aequo et hic exceptio ei accommodanda est.
Yet when either a river has overflowed to such an extent that it filled the whole place in which appearance was required, or some accidental calamity destroyed that place or made presence dangerous for the one coming, according to what is good and fair here too a plea must be granted to him.
§2.11.2.9Simili modo exceptio datur ei, qui cum ad iudicium uenire uolebat, a magistratu retentus est, et retentus sine dolo malo ipsius: nam si ipse hoc affectauit uel causam praestitit, non ei proderit exceptio: sed ipsius quidem dolus ei oberit, ceterorum non oberit, qui dolo fecerunt ut retineretur.
In like manner, a plea is given to him who, while he wished to come to court, was detained by a magistrate, and detained without any malicious intent of his own; for if he himself sought this or provided a cause, the plea will not benefit him; thus indeed his own fraud will harm him, but that of others, who acted with fraud so that he might be detained, will not harm him.
sed si priuatus eum detinuerit, nullo modo ei proderit haec exceptio,
But if a private person has detained him, in no way will this plea benefit him,