Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §2.14.39.pr

Contra Proferentem Interpretation of Ambiguous Terms

Passage 405 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Papinianus states the opinion of the ancient jurists that obscure or ambiguous contractual terms should be interpreted against the seller or lessor, who had the power to draft them more clearly.

[IDEM libro quinto quaestionum. ] §2.14.39.prUeteribus placet pactionem obscuram uel ambiguam uenditori et qui locauit nocere, in quorum fuit potestate legem apertius conscribere.
[THE SAME, Questions, book 5] It is accepted by the ancient jurists that an obscure or ambiguous agreement is prejudicial to the seller and to the lessor, in whose power it was to draft the term more clearly.

Notes

  1. §2.14.39.prUeteribus — Masculine plural dative of the adjective uetus used substantively. It functions as the dative with placet, meaning 'it is accepted by the ancient jurists' (referring to Republican or early classical jurists).
  2. §2.14.39.prlegem — Here lex does not mean a 'statute' enacted by the state, but rather a 'contractual term' or 'condition' (lex contractus) binding between the parties.
  3. §2.14.39.prin quorum fuit potestate — The relative pronoun quorum refers back to uenditori et qui locauit (the seller and the lessor). The idiom in potestate alicuius esse means 'to be within one's power or control.' The real subject of fuit is the following infinitive phrase legem apertius conscribere (to draft the term more clearly).

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §2.14.39.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:2.14.39.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.