Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §24.3.17.pr-24.3.17.2

Defenses for Father-in-Law and Wife and Protection for Husband

Passage 3608 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This chunk discusses the applicability of similar legal protection to a father-in-law or a wife sued by the husband, and notes that a husband condemned for the full amount due to a judge's ignorance of law should be protected by an exception.

[PAULUS libro septimo ad Sabinum. ] §24.3.17.prEx diuerso si socer ex promissione a marito conueniatur, solet quaeri, an idem ei honor habendus sit: Neratius libris membranarum et Proculus scribunt hoc iustum esse.
[PAULUS, Book 7 on Sabinus] Conversely, if a father-in-law is sued by the husband on the basis of a promise, it is usually asked whether the same respect should be shown to him; Neratius in his books of parchments and Proculus write that this is just.
§24.3.17.1Item si mulier ex promissione conueniatur, magis placuit defendendam eam per exceptionem: idem et Proculus ait: sicuti cum socia fuit, dabitur ei exceptio, quamuis iure ciuili sit obligata.
Likewise, if the wife is sued on the basis of a promise, the opinion has rather prevailed that she should be defended by an exception; Proculus also says the same thing: since she was a partner, an exception will be granted to her, although she is obligated under civil law.
§24.3.17.2Si in iudicio dotis iudex ignorantia iuris lapsus condemnauerit maritum in solidum, Neratius Sabinus doli exceptione eum uti oportere aiunt eaque tutum fore.
If, in an action for dowry, the judge, having erred through ignorance of the law, condemns the husband for the full amount, Neratius and Sabinus say that he ought to use the exception of fraud, and that he will be safe by it.

Notes

  1. §24.3.17.pran idem ei honor habendus sit — Within the indirect question introduced by an, the gerundive habendus and sit form a passive periphrastic conjugation in the subjunctive mood. 'Idem honor' (the same respect) refers to the benefit of competence (beneficium competentiae).
  2. §24.3.17.1defendendam eam per exceptionem — This is an accusative and infinitive clause functioning as the subject of the impersonal verb phrase magis placuit, with the copula esse omitted after the gerundive defendendam.
  3. §24.3.17.1cum socia fuit — The conjunction cum is used here with the indicative perfect fuit to state a factual premise or reason, meaning 'since she was a partner.'
  4. §24.3.17.2eaque tutum fore — This is part of the accusative and infinitive structure governed by aiunt, with the subject accusative eum (referring to the husband) omitted before the future infinitive fore (alternative form of futurum esse). The ablative feminine ea refers back to doli exceptione (the exception of fraud), meaning 'by it.'

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §24.3.17.pr-24.3.17.2. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:24.3.17.pr-24.3.17.2

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.