Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §24.1.64.pr

Validity of Gifts Made after Divorce to Induce Reunion

Passage 3576 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Regarding the validity of donations made after a divorce to encourage a reunion, the text cites the precedent of Trebatius and the opinions of Proculus and Caecilius, arguing that such a donation is valid only if the reality of the divorce is confirmed by objective facts like a subsequent marriage or a long period of separation.

[IAUOLENUS libro sexto ex posterioribus Labeonis. ] §24.1.64.prUir mulieri diuortio facto quaedam idcirco dederat, ut ad se reuerteretur: mulier reuersa erat, deinde diuortium fecerat.
[IAUOLENUS, in the sixth book of Labeo's Posthumous Works.] A husband had given certain things to his wife after a divorce had taken place, for the purpose that she should return to him; the woman returned, and then she divorced him.
LABEO: Trebatius inter Terentiam et Maecenatem respondit si uerum diuortium fuisset, ratam esse donationem, si simulatum, contra.
LABEO: Trebatius answered, in the case between Terentia and Maecenas, that if the divorce had been real, the donation was valid, but if it was simulated, the contrary.
sed uerum est, quod Proculus et Caecilius putant, tunc uerum esse diuortium et ualere donationem diuortii causa factam, si aliae nuptiae insecutae sunt aut tam longo tempore uidua fuisset, ut dubium non foret alterum esse matrimonium: alias nec donationem ullius esse momenti futuram.
But that which Proculus and Caecilius hold is correct, namely, that a divorce is real and a donation made on account of divorce is valid only then, if another marriage followed or she had been without a husband for so long a time that there would be no doubt that it was another marriage; otherwise, the donation would not be of any validity.

Notes

  1. 24.1.64.pridcirco ... ut — The adverb idcirco (for this reason) anticipates and emphasizes the subsequent purpose clause introduced by ut ad se reuerteretur.
  2. 24.1.64.prsi simulatum, contra — An elliptical expression where ratam non esse donationem (the donation is not valid) or irritam esse is understood by contrast with the preceding clause si uerum diuortium fuisset, ratam esse donationem.
  3. 24.1.64.prquod Proculus et Caecilius putant, tunc uerum esse — The relative pronoun quod introduces the opinion held by Proculus and Caecilius, which serves as the subject of the main verb uerum est, with the specific content of their opinion developed in the accusative-with-infinitive clause tunc uerum esse...
  4. 24.1.64.prullius esse momenti futuram — momenti is a genitive of quality, which combined with esse means "to have force/validity". futuram is a future active infinitive with esse omitted, agreeing in gender, number, and case with its subject donationem.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §24.1.64.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:24.1.64.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.