Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §3.3.33.pr-3.3.33.5

Procurators for Persons in Power and Defense Duties

Passage 516 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This section discusses the capacity of slaves, sons-in-power, and persons litigating their status to have a procurator, the defense of absent parties, and the duties of defense and security imposed on litigation procurators under the Praetorian Edict.

[ULPIANUS libro nono ad edictum. ] §3.3.33.prSeruum quoque et filium familias procuratorem posse habere aiunt.
[ULPIANUS, in the ninth book on the Edict.]\n\nThey say that a slave and a son-in-power can also have a procurator.
et quantum ad filium familias uerum est: in seruo subsistimus.
And as far as the son-in-power is concerned, this is true; in the case of a slave, we hesitate.
et negotia quidem peculiaria serui posse gerere aliquem et hoc casu procuratorem eius esse admittimus, quod et Labeoni uidetur: actionem autem intendere uetamus. §3.3.33.1Eum uero qui de statu suo litigat procuratorem habere posse non dubitamus non solum in administratione rerum, sed etiam in actionibus, quae ei uel aduersus eum competant, ex possessione siue seruitutis siue libertatis de suo statu litigat.
Indeed, we admit that someone can manage the affairs relating to the slave's peculium and, in this case, be his procurator—which is also Labeo's view—but we forbid him to bring an action.\n\nOn the other hand, we do not doubt that he who is litigating concerning his status can have a procurator, not only in the administration of property, but also in actions which lie in his favor or against him, provided that he is litigating concerning his status from a possession of either slavery or freedom.
ex contrario quoque eum procuratorem dari posse manifestum est. §3.3.33.2Publice utile est absentes a quibuscumque defendi: nam et in capitalibus iudiciis defensio datur.
Conversely, it is also manifest that he can be appointed as a procurator.\n\nIt is of public utility that absent persons be defended by anyone whomsoever; for defense is allowed even in capital trials.
ubicumque itaque absens quis damnari potest, ibi quemuis uerba pro eo facientem et innocentiam excusantem audiri aequum est et ordinarium admittere: quod et ex rescripto imperatoris nostri apparet. §3.3.33.3Ait praetor: 'Cuius nomine quis actionem dari sibi postulabit, is eum uiri boni arbitratu defendat: et ei quo nomine aget id ratum habere eum ad quem ea res pertinet, boni uiri arbitratu satisdet'. §3.3.33.4Aequum praetori uisum est eum, qui alicuius nomine procurator experitur, eundem etiam defensionem suscipere. §3.3.33.5Si quis in rem suam procurator interueniat, adhuc erit dicendum debere eum defendere: nisi forte ex necessitate fuerit factus.
Therefore, wherever an absent person can be condemned, it is equitable that anyone speaking on his behalf and pleading his innocence should be heard, and that his admission should be ordinary; which also appears from a rescript of our Emperor.\n\nThe Praetor says: 'In whose name anyone shall demand that an action be granted to him, he shall defend that person according to the judgment of an upright man; and he shall give security, according to the judgment of an upright man, to the party against whom he is acting, that the person to whom the matter pertains will ratify his action.'\n\nIt seemed equitable to the Praetor that he who sues as a procurator in another's name should also undertake the defense of that person.\n\nIf anyone intervenes as a procurator in his own interest, it must still be said that he ought to defend; unless perhaps he was made such out of necessity.

Notes

  1. §3.3.33.prin seruo subsistimus — The verb `subsistere` means 'to halt' or 'to hesitate.' Here it indicates that the jurists hesitate to unconditionally grant the capacity to have a procurator in the case of a slave, pausing their assent.
  2. §3.3.33.1ex possessione siue seruitutis siue libertatis — The genitives `seruitutis` and `libertatis` modify the noun `possessione` (possession, factual state). This refers to the factual state prior to the lawsuit, i.e., whether the litigant was factually possessed as a slave or as a free person.
  3. §3.3.33.2et ordinarium admittere — The active infinitive `admittere` forms, together with the preceding passive `audiri`, the subject clause of `aequum est`. Here `ordinarium` is understood substantively as 'as an ordinary (defender)', serving as the object or complement of `admittere`.
  4. §3.3.33.3id ratum habere eum ad quem ea res pertinet — This is an accusative with infinitive construction acting as the object of `satisdet` (to give security). `eum ad quem ea res pertinet` (the person to whom the matter pertains, i.e., the principal) is the subject accusative of `habere`, and `id ratum habere` means 'to ratify it (hold it as valid)'.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §3.3.33.pr-3.3.33.5. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:3.3.33.pr-3.3.33.5

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.