Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §31.0.22.pr

Reclaiming a Lifetime Gift and Testator Intent

Passage 4748 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Celsus discusses whether a legatee can demand a legacy (military office or its price) again after receiving it during the testator's lifetime, and the burden of proof regarding the change of the testator's intent.

[IDEM libro uicesimo primo digestorum. ] §31.0.22.prLucius Titius in testamento suo Publio Maeuio militiam suam reliquit siue pecuniam eius quaecumque redigi ex uenditione eius potuerit, cum suis commodis: sed cum superuixit testamento Lucius Titius, militiam uendidit et pretium exegit et dedit ei, cui illam militiam uel pretium eius testamento dari uoluerit: post mortem Lucii Titii iterum Publius Maeuius uel militiam uel pretium eius ab heredibus Lucii Titii exigebat.
[THE SAME, in the twenty-first book of his digests.] Lucius Titius in his testament left to Publius Maeuius his military office, or whatever money could be realized from the sale thereof, together with its advantages; but when Lucius Titius survived the testament, he sold the military office, collected the price, and gave it to him to whom he had wished that military office or its price to be given by the testament. After the death of Lucius Titius, Publius Maeuius again demanded either the military office or its price from the heirs of Lucius Titius.
Celsus: existimo pretium militiae praestari non oportere, nisi legatarius ostenderit testatorem et post factam solutionem iterum eum pretium militiae accipere uoluisse.
Celsus: I think that the price of the military office ought not to be paid, unless the legatee shows that the testator, even after the payment was made, wished him to receive the price of the military office again.
quod si non totum pretium militiae, sed partem uiuus testator legatario dedit, reliqui superesse exactionem, nisi heres et ab hoc decessisse testatorem ostenderit.
But if the living testator gave to the legatee not the whole price of the military office but a part of it, I think that the demand for the remainder survives, unless the heir shows that the testator departed from this as well.
onus enim probandi mutatam esse defuncti uoluntatem ad eum pertinet, qui fideicommissum recusat.
For the burden of proving that the deceased's will was changed belongs to him who refuses the trust.

Notes

  1. 31.0.22.prsuperuixit testamento — The verb 'supervivere' governs the dative ('testamento') and means 'to outlive' or 'to survive'. Here it refers to the testator surviving the making of the testament.
  2. 31.0.22.prreliqui superesse exactionem — An accusative with infinitive construction depending on the main verb 'existimo' from the previous sentence. The noun 'exactionem' is the subject of the infinitive 'superesse', and 'reliqui' is the partitive genitive of 'reliquum' (the remainder), modifying 'exactionem'.
  3. 31.0.22.prab hoc decessisse — The word 'decessisse' is the perfect infinitive of 'decedere' (to depart, withdraw). Here it is used elliptically for the juristic expression 'decedere de voluntate' (to depart from one's will or intent, i.e., to change one's mind), meaning together with 'ab hoc' (from this) that the testator departed from his intention regarding this remaining part as well.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §31.0.22.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:31.0.22.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.