Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §36.1.9.pr-36.1.9.3

Compulsion to Enter Inheritance upon Absence, Deliberation, and Conditions

Passage 5560 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Ulpian discusses the compulsion of entering and restoring an inheritance while absent or after deliberation, and the status of conditional heirs.

[ULPIANUS libro quarto fideicommissorum. ] §36.1.9.prSed et si alio loco iussus est adire et rei publicae causa absit, aeque cogendum adire hereditatem et restituere Iulianus ait, ubi abest.
[ULPIANUS from the fourth book on Trusts.] But even if he is ordered to enter in another place and is absent on public business, Julian says that he must likewise be compelled to enter upon and restore the inheritance in the place where he is absent.
§36.1.9.1Plane si quis petierit ad deliberationem tempus et impetrauerit, deinde post tempus deliberationis adierit et restituerit hereditatem, non uidetur coactus hoc fecisse: nec enim suspectam coactus adit, sed sponte post deliberationem.
Clearly, if anyone requested and obtained time for deliberation, and then, after the time for deliberation, entered upon and restored the inheritance, he does not seem to have done this under compulsion; for he does not enter upon a suspect inheritance under compulsion, but voluntarily after deliberation.
§36.1.9.2Quod si suspectam dicit, profiteri debet non sibi expedire adire hereditatem, neque hoc dici oportere non esse soluendo, sed profiteri eum oportet, quod non putat sibi expedire hereditatem adire.
But if he says it is suspect, he must declare that it is not expedient for him to enter upon the inheritance, and it is not necessary for this to be said, namely, that it is insolvent, but it is necessary for him to declare that he does not think it is expedient for him to enter upon the inheritance.
§36.1.9.3Si quis sub condicione fuit heres scriptus, pendente condicione nihil agit, tametsi paratus sit restituere hereditatem.
If anyone was designated as heir under a condition, while the condition is pending he achieves nothing, even though he may be prepared to restore the inheritance.

Notes

  1. §36.1.9.prcogendum — In this passage, `esse` is omitted from `cogendum esse`, forming a gerundive in the accusative that acts as the predicate of the infinitive clause dependent on `Iulianus ait` ('Julian says'). The logical subject in the accusative is not explicitly expressed, but `eum`, referring to the heir, is contextually understood from the subject of `iussus est` in the conditional clause.
  2. §36.1.9.1suspectam — An accusative feminine singular form of the adjective `suspectus, -a, -um` ('suspected'), where the preceding noun `hereditatem` ('inheritance') is contextually omitted. In Roman law, a 'suspect inheritance' (`hereditas suspecta`) refers to an estate suspected of being insolvent or heavily burdened with debt.
  3. §36.1.9.2non esse soluendo — An idiom combining the verb `esse` with the dative of the gerundive `soluendo` ('for paying'). The phrase `soluendo esse` means 'to be solvent'. Here, negated by `non`, it means 'to be insolvent', forming the subject (or predicate) clause governed by `dici oportere`.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §36.1.9.pr-36.1.9.3. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:36.1.9.pr-36.1.9.3

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.