Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §27.1.37.pr-27.1.37.1

Defective Decrees on Guardianship and Equitable Actions

Passage 3978 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Regarding a person who failed to administer a guardianship based on a defective decree of the praetor, it is determined that although the excuse is invalid due to the defect, no equitable action lies against him since he acted out of error rather than malice.

[SCAEUOLA libro secundo responsorum. ] §27.1.37.prQui testamento tutor datus fuerat, adito praetore dixit se tres liberos habere, adiecit praeterea habenti patruum legitimum tutorem se uitiose tutorem datum.
[SCAEVOLA, from the second book of Opinions.] A person who had been appointed tutor by testament, having approached the praetor, said that he had three children, and added moreover that he had been appointed tutor defectively for one who already had a paternal uncle as his statutory tutor.
praetor ita decreuit: 'si legitimum tutorem habenti tutor datus es, non est tibi necessaria excusatio'. quaero, cum nemo patruus impuberi tutor esset, an nihilo minus tutor remansit.
The praetor decreed as follows: 'If you have been appointed tutor for one who has a statutory tutor, an excuse is not necessary for you.' I ask, since no paternal uncle was tutor to the pupil, whether he nevertheless remained tutor.
respondi secundum ea quae proponerentur, quamuis iustas excusationis causas haberet, non tamen esse excusatum propter uitium pronuntiationis.
I replied that, according to the facts proposed, although he had just causes for excuse, he was nevertheless not excused because of the defect in the decree.
§27.1.37.1Item quaero, si adquieuisset sententiae, an ob id, quod non gessit tutelam, utilis actio in hunc dari debeat.
I also ask, if he had acquiesced in the decision, whether on account of this, that he did not conduct the guardianship, an equitable action ought to be granted against him.
respondi, si errore potius (quod se pro iure trium liberorum, quod allegabat, excusatum crederet) quam malitia ab administratione cessasset, utilem actionem non dandam.
I replied that, if he had ceased from administration by error (because he believed himself to be excused by virtue of the right of his three children, which he was alleging) rather than by malice, the equitable action ought not to be granted.

Notes

  1. §27.1.37.prhabenti patruum legitimum tutorem — The present participle `habenti` (dative singular) modifies the omitted pupil and functions as the dative object of the indirect statement `se uitiose tutorem datum [esse]`. `patruum` is the direct object of `habenti`, and `legitimum tutorem` is its predicative accusative ("to one having a paternal uncle as statutory tutor").
  2. §27.1.37.prpropter uitium pronuntiationis — This refers to the fact that because the praetor's decree (pronuntiatio) was based on the false premise that there was a statutory tutor, the decree itself was defective (uitium), and thus a legally valid excuse was not established. Consequently, although he had a just cause (three children), he remained tutor.
  3. §27.1.37.1quod se pro iure trium liberorum... excusatum crederet — The subjunctive `crederet` in the `quod` clause indicates the subjective belief or reason of the actor ("because he believed himself...") rather than an objective fact.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §27.1.37.pr-27.1.37.1. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:27.1.37.pr-27.1.37.1

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.