Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §3.5.29.pr

Action for Management of Affairs Against a Sub-Curator

Passage 601 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

The text discusses what action a curator for purchasing wheat can bring against a sub-curator who ruined the wheat, concluding through analogies with co-guardians and magistrates that an action for the management of affairs should be granted.

[IULIANUS libro tertio digestorum. ] §3.5.29.prEx facto quaerebatur: quendam ad siliginem emendam curatorem decreto ordinis constitutum: eidem alium subcuratorem constitutum siliginem miscendo corrupisse atque ita pretium siliginis, quae in publicum empta erat, curatori adflictum esse: quaque actione curator cum subcuratore experiri possit et consequi id, ut ei saluum esset, quod causa eius damnum cepisset.
[JULIANUS, Digest, Book III] A question was asked on the basis of the following fact: a certain person was appointed by a decree of the local senate as curator for purchasing wheat; another person was appointed as sub-curator for him, and this sub-curator ruined the wheat by mixing it, and thus the loss of the price of the wheat, which had been purchased for the public, fell upon the curator. By what action can the curator sue the sub-curator and obtain that the damage he suffered on his account should be made good to him?
Ualerius Seuerus respondit aduersus contutorem negotiorum gestorum actionem tutori dandam: idem respondit: ut magistratui aduersus magistratum eadem actio detur, ita tamen, si non sit conscius fraudis.
Valerius Severus answered that an action for the management of affairs should be given to a guardian against his co-guardian; he also answered that the same action should be given to a magistrate against another magistrate, provided, however, that he was not an accomplice to the fraud.
secundum quae etiam in subcuratore idem dicendum est.
According to these principles, the same must be said also in the case of a sub-curator.

Notes

  1. 3.5.29.prquendam ad siliginem emendam curatorem decreto ordinis constitutum — The entire factual context following the main verb `quaerebatur` is presented through a series of accusative with infinitive (A.c.I.) constructions: `quendam... constitutum [esse]`, `corrupisse`, and `adflictum esse`. The auxiliary verb `esse` is omitted and must be supplied.
  2. 3.5.29.prut ei saluum esset, quod causa eius damnum cepisset — The `ut` clause is a noun clause of result or purpose explaining the preceding object `id`. `quod` is a relative pronoun whose antecedent is an implied `id` or `damnum`, meaning 'the loss which he had suffered (cepisset)'. `causa eius` expresses the cause, meaning 'on his account' (referring to the sub-curator).
  3. 3.5.29.prut magistratui aduersus magistratum eadem actio detur — The content of the response shift from the gerundive construction (`dandam [esse]`) in the previous sentence to an `ut` clause with the subjunctive (`detur`), expressing an indirect command or recommendation.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §3.5.29.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:3.5.29.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.