Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §2.14.16.pr-2.14.16.1

Plea of Fraud Based on Agreements with Third Parties

Passage 382 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Discusses the effectiveness of the plea of fraud for a debtor when an agreement is made with the buyer of an inheritance, and the impact of an agreement to return the sold object on a claim for the price by an agent.

[ULPIANUS libro quarto ad edictum. ] §2.14.16.prSi cum emptore hereditatis pactum sit factum et uenditor hereditatis petat, doli exceptio nocet.
[ULPIANUS, On the Edict, book 4] If an agreement is made with the buyer of an inheritance and the seller of the inheritance sues, the plea of fraud is prejudicial.
nam ex quo rescriptum est a diuo Pio utiles actiones emptori hereditatis dandas, merito aduersus uenditorem hereditatis exceptione doli debitor hereditarius uti potest.
For since the deified Pius issued a rescript that beneficial actions must be granted to the buyer of an inheritance, the hereditary debtor can deservedly use the plea of fraud against the seller of the inheritance.
§2.14.16.1Sed et si inter dominum rei uenditae et emptorem conuenisset, ut homo qui emptus erat redderetur, ei qui pro domino rem uendidit petenti pretium doli exceptio nocebit.
But also, if it has been agreed between the owner of the sold property and the buyer that the slave who had been bought should be returned, the plea of fraud will prejudice the person who sold the property on behalf of the owner when he sues for the price.

Notes

  1. §2.14.16.prex quo — An elliptical expression for 'ex quo tempore', meaning 'since' or 'from the time when'. It marks the legal change introduced after the rescript of the deified Pius.
  2. §2.14.16.prutiles actiones emptori hereditatis dandas — An accusative with infinitive clause (with 'esse' omitted) acting as the subject of the impersonal passive 'rescriptum est' ('it was ruled by rescript'). The gerundive 'dandas' expresses passive necessity or obligation ('must be granted').
  3. §2.14.16.1ei qui pro domino rem uendidit petenti pretium — The demonstrative 'ei' (dative singular of 'is') is the indirect object governed by the verb 'nocebit'. It is modified by the relative clause 'qui pro domino rem uendidit' and the appositive present participle 'petenti' (which governs 'pretium' as its object). The structure translates as 'to him [who sold the property on behalf of the owner] [when he sues for the price]'.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §2.14.16.pr-2.14.16.1. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:2.14.16.pr-2.14.16.1

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.