[ULPIANUS libro quarto fideicommissorum. ] §36.1.15.1Sed et qui repudiauit hereditatem, cogetur adire et restituere ipsam hereditatem, si iustae causae allegentur.
[ULPIANUS libro quarto fideicommissorum.] But even he who has repudiated an inheritance will be compelled to enter upon and restore the inheritance itself, if just causes are alleged.
§36.1.15.2Plane si bona uenierint, non oportet praetorem ne quidem pupillum restituere nisi ex causa, ut diuus Pius rescripsit.
Clearly, if the property has been sold, the praetor ought not to restore even a pupil, except for a cause, as the deified Pius wrote in a rescript.
§36.1.15.3Si quis compulsus adierit hereditatem ex testamento, quod secundas tabulas habebat, quaesitum est, an per aditionem et tabulae secundae firmarentur, quod uidebantur euanuisse non adita patris hereditate.
If someone, being compelled, has entered upon an inheritance under a will which had secondary tablets, it was asked whether the secondary tablets were also confirmed by the entry, because they seemed to have vanished since the father's inheritance was not entered upon.
et Iulianus libro quinto decimo scribit et sequentes tabulas confirmari: quae sententia uerissima est: nemo enim dubitat etiam legata praestari et libertates competere et cetera, quaecumque sint in testamento, perinde ualere, ac si sua sponte heres hereditatem adisset.
And Julian writes in his fifteenth book that the subsequent tablets are also confirmed; which opinion is most true: for no one doubts that legacies are also paid, and freedoms are acquired, and all other things, whatever they may be in the will, are equally valid as if the heir had entered upon the inheritance of his own accord.
§36.1.15.4Qui compulsus adit hereditatem, sicuti ceteris commodis caret, ita hoc quoque casu careat, ne possit paenitendo quartam retinere: et ita inuenio ab imperatore nostro et diuo patre eius rescriptum.
He who enters upon an inheritance under compulsion, just as he lacks other advantages, so in this case also let him lack this, lest he be able, by changing his mind, to retain the fourth; and so I find it was written in a rescript by our emperor and his deified father.
§36.1.15.5Non omnis autem suspectam hereditatem repudiatione amissam cogere potest adiri et sibi restitui, sed is demum, ad quem actiones transire possunt: neque enim aequum est ad hoc quem compelli adire hereditatem, ut emolumentum quidem hereditatis refundat, ipse uero oneribus hereditatis obstrictus relinquatur.
However, not everyone can compel a suspect inheritance, lost by repudiation, to be entered upon and restored to himself, but only he to whom the actions can pass; for it is not fair that anyone should be compelled to enter upon an inheritance for this purpose, that he should refund the advantage of the inheritance, but himself be left bound by the burdens of the inheritance.
§36.1.15.6Quare si fideicommissum pecuniarium alicui fuerit relictum, cessat compulsio, tametsi indemnitatis cautio offeratur.
Therefore, if a pecuniary trust has been left to someone, the compulsion ceases, even though a security of indemnity is offered.
§36.1.15.7Proinde qui 'hereditatem' rogatur restituere, is demum compellitur restituere.
Accordingly, he who is asked to restore the "inheritance" is alone compelled to restore it.
§36.1.15.8Sed et si quis 'bona' rogatus sit uel 'familiam' uel 'pecuniam' rogetur uel 'uniuersam rem meam'.
But also if anyone is asked to restore "property," or "family," or "money," or "my entire estate."