Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §22.1.19.pr-22.1.19.1

Restoration of Fruits and Use in Various Claims

Passage 3179 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

The author discusses whether and how a possessor should be condemned to restore fruits or advantages in various types of claims, including bare ownership, usufruct, garments, and rights of way.

[GAIUS libro sexto ad legem duodecim tabularum. ] §22.1.19.prUideamus, an in omnibus rebus petitis in fructus quoque condemnatur possessor.
[GAIUS, from his sixth book on the Law of the Twelve Tables.] Let us see whether the possessor is condemned also for fruits in all things sued for.
quid enim si argentum aut uestimentum aliamue similem rem, quid praeterea si usum fructum aut nudam proprietatem, cum alienus usus fructus sit, petierit? neque enim nudae proprietatis, quod ad proprietatis nomen attinet, fructus ullus intellegi potest, neque usus fructus rursus fructus eleganter computabitur.
For what if a person sues for silver, or a garment, or another similar thing? What, moreover, if he sues for a usufruct, or for the bare ownership when the usufruct belongs to another? For no fruit can be understood of bare ownership, so far as the name of ownership is concerned, nor again will the fruit of a usufruct be elegantly calculated.
quid igitur, si nuda proprietas petita sit? ex quo perdiderit fructuarius usum fructum, aestimabuntur in petitione fructus.
What then, if bare ownership is sued for? From the time when the usufructuary loses the usufruct, the fruits shall be estimated in the suit.
item si usus fructus petitus sit, Proculus ait in fructus perceptos condemnari.
Likewise, if a usufruct is sued for, Proculus says that the possessor is to be condemned for the fruits gathered.
praeterea Gallus Aelius putat, si uestimenta aut scyphus petita sint, in fructu haec numeranda esse, quod locata ea re mercedis nomine capi potuerit.
Furthermore, Gallus Aelius thinks that if garments or a cup are sued for, these ought to be numbered among the fruits, because if that thing had been leased, it could have been acquired under the name of rent.
§22.1.19.1Iter quoque et actus si petitus sit, uix est ut fructus ulli possint aestimari, nisi si quis commodum in fructibus numeraret, quod habiturus esset petitor, si statim eo tempore quo petisset ire agere non prohiberetur: quod admittendum est.
If a right of way or a right of driving is sued for, it is hardly possible that any fruits can be estimated, unless one were to count among the fruits the advantage which the claimant would have had, if he had not been prohibited from going and driving at the very time when he brought the suit: which view must be admitted.

Notes

  1. 22.1.19.prquid enim si — An idiomatic expression introducing an illustrative or contrasting scenario. A verb like petierit (should he sue for) is omitted here and must be supplied from the context.
  2. 22.1.19.preleganter — An adverb frequently used by classical jurists, meaning not merely 'elegantly' but 'consistently with fine logical reasoning' or 'with doctrinal precision'.
  3. 22.1.19.1uix est ut — A construction consisting of uix est followed by an ut-clause with the subjunctive, expressing a strong negative possibility ('it is hardly possible that...').
  4. 22.1.19.1nisi si quis — Introduced by nisi si (unless), the following subjunctive forms habiturus esset (imperfect subjunctive periphrastic active) and si... prohiberetur (imperfect subjunctive) form a double conditional structure of counterfactual hypotheses regarding past or present events.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §22.1.19.pr-22.1.19.1. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:22.1.19.pr-22.1.19.1

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.