[ULPIANUS libro quinquagensimo secundo ad edictum. ] §39.1.5.prDe pupillo quaesitum est: et Iulianus libro duodecimo digestorum scripsit pupillo non esse operis noui nuntiationis executionem dandam, nisi ad ipsius priuatum commodum res pertineat, ueluti si luminibus eius officiatur aut prospectui obsit.
[ULPIANUS in the fifty-second book on the Edict.] A question has been raised concerning a pupillus; and Julian, in the twelfth book of his Digests, wrote that the execution of the notice of a new work should not be given to a pupillus, unless the matter concerns his own private advantage, for instance, if his lights are obstructed or his view is blocked.
non aliter autem pupilli rata habebitur nuntiatio quam intercedente tutore auctore.
However, the notice of a pupillus will not be held valid unless the tutor intervenes as author.
§39.1.5.1Seruo autem opus nouum nuntiari potest, ipse uero nuntiare non potest neque nuntiatio ullum effectum habet.
Moreover, a new work can be notified to a slave, but he himself cannot give notice, nor does his notice have any effect.
§39.1.5.2Nuntiationem autem in re praesenti faciendam meminisse oportebit, id est eo loci, ubi opus fiat, siue quis aedificet siue inchoet aedificare.
Furthermore, it must be remembered that the notice must be given on the spot, that is, in the place where the work is being done, whether someone is building or beginning to build.
§39.1.5.3Nuntiari autem non utique domino oportet: sufficit enim in re praesenti nuntiari ei, qui in re praesenti fuerit, usque adeo, ut etiam fabris uel opificibus, qui eo loci operantur, opus nouum nuntiari possit.
Nor is it absolutely necessary to notify the owner; for it is sufficient to notify anyone on the spot who is present, so much so that notice of a new work can even be given to the craftsmen or workmen who are working in that place.
et generaliter ei nuntiari opus nouum potest, qui in re praesenti fuit domini operisue nomine, neque refert, quis sit iste uel cuius condicionis qui in re praesenti fuit: nam et si seruo nuntietur uel mulieri uel puero uel puellae, tenet nuntiatio: sufficit enim in re praesenti operis noui nuntiationem factam sic, ut domino possit renuntiari.
And generally, notice of a new work can be given to anyone who was on the spot in the name of the owner or of the work, nor does it matter who this person is or what his status is; for even if notice is given to a slave, a woman, a boy, or a girl, the notice is valid; for it is sufficient that the notice of a new work is given on the spot in such a way that it can be reported back to the owner.
§39.1.5.4Si quis forte in foro domino opus nouum nuntiat, hanc nuntiationem nullius esse momenti exploratissimum est: in re enim praesenti et paene dixerim ipso opere, hoc est in re ipsa, nuntiatio facienda est: quod idcirco receptum est, ut confestim per nuntiationem ab opere discedatur.
If someone happens to notify the owner of a new work in the forum, it is well established that this notice is of no moment; for the notice must be given on the spot and, I might almost say, at the work itself, that is, on the thing itself. This has been accepted so that the work may be immediately abandoned upon the notice.
ceterum si alibi fiat nuntiatio, illud incommodi sequitur, quod, dum uenitur ad opus si quid fuerit operis per ignorantiam factum, euenit, ut contra edictum praetoris sit factum.
Otherwise, if the notice is given elsewhere, this disadvantage follows: that while one is coming to the work, if any work has been done through ignorance, it turns out to have been done contrary to the praetor's edict.
§39.1.5.5Si plurium res sit, in qua opus nouum fiat et uni nuntietur, recte facta nuntiatio est omnibusque dominis uidetur denuntiatum: sed si unus aedificauerit post operis noui nuntiationem, alii, qui non aedificauerint, non tenebuntur: neque enim debet nocere factum alterius ei qui nihil fecit.
If a thing in which a new work is being done belongs to several persons, and notice is given to one, the notice is correctly given and is deemed to have been declared to all owners; but if one of them builds after the notice of a new work, the others who did not build will not be held liable; for the act of one person should not harm another who did nothing.
§39.1.5.6Si plurium dominorum rei opus noceat, utrum sufficiet unius ex sociis nuntiatio an uero omnes nuntiare debeant? et est uerius unius nuntiationem omnibus non sufficere, sed esse singulis nuntiare necesse, quia et fieri potest, ut nuntiatorum alter habeat, alter non habeat ius prohibendi.
If a work harms a thing belonging to several owners, will the notice of one of the co-owners be sufficient, or must all of them give notice? And it is more correct that the notice of one is not sufficient for all, but it is necessary for each to give notice, because it can happen that one of the notifiers has the right to forbid, while another does not.
§39.1.5.7Si quis ipsi praetori uelit opus nouum nuntiare, debet, ut interim testetur non posse se nuntiare: et si nuntiauit postea, et quod retro aedificatum erit destruendum erit, quasi repetito die nuntiatione facta.
If someone wishes to notify the praetor himself of a new work, he must do so in order to protest in the meantime that he is unable to notify; and if he notifies afterwards, even what was built in the meantime must be demolished, as if the notice had been given with a retroactive date.
§39.1.5.8Sed et si in aedes nostras quis immittit aut in loco nostro aedificet, aequum est nos operis noui nuntiatione ius nostrum nobis conseruare.
But also, if anyone inserts anything into our house or builds on our ground, it is equitable that we preserve our right for ourselves by the notice of a new work.
§39.1.5.9Et belle Sextus Pedius definiit triplicem esse causam operis noui nuntiationis, aut naturalem aut publicam aut impositiciam: naturalem, cum in nostras aedes quid immittitur aut aedificatur in nostro, publicam causam, quotiens leges aut senatus consulta constitutionesque principum per operis noui nuntiationem tuemur, impositiciam, cum quis postea, quam ius suum deminuit, alterius auxit, hoc est postea, quam seruitutem aedibus suis imposuit, contra seruitutem fecit.
And Sextus Pedius beautifully defined that the cause of the notice of a new work is threefold, either natural, public, or impositive: natural, when something is inserted into our house or built on our ground; public cause, whenever we protect laws, senate decrees, or imperial constitutions by the notice of a new work; impositive, when someone, after diminishing his own right and increasing another's—that is, after imposing a servitude on his house—has acted contrary to the servitude.