Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §39.2.11.pr

Security for Threatened Damage Concerning Pledge Creditors

Passage 6132 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Ulpian discusses whether a pledge creditor should provide or receive security, presenting Marcellus's negative view regarding both pledge creditors and non-owner buyers, but argues that it is most equitable to protect the creditor through a stipulation.

[ULPIANUS libro quinquagensimo tertio ad edictum. ] §39.2.11.prQuid de creditore dicemus, qui pignus accepit? utrum repromittere, quia suum ius tuetur, an satisdare, quia dominus non est, debebit? quae species est in contrario latere apud Marcellum agitata, an creditori pigneraticio damni infecti caueri debeat.
[ULPIAN on the edict, book 53.] What shall we say of a creditor who has received a pledge? Will he have to promise, because he is protecting his own right, or to give security, because he is not the owner? This case is discussed by Marcellus from the opposite side, namely, whether security for threatened damage should be provided to a pledge creditor.
et ait Marcellus inutiliter ei caueri: idemque etiam de eo cauendum qui non a domino emit: nam nec in huius persona committi stipulationem.
And Marcellus says that security is provided to him to no purpose; and that the same must be said of providing security for one who did not buy from the owner; for in the person of this latter also, the stipulation does not take effect.
aequissimum tamen puto huic prospiciendum, id est creditori, per stipulationem.
I think it most equitable, however, that provision should be made for this person, that is, for the creditor, by means of a stipulation.

Notes

  1. §39.2.11.prin contrario latere — The phrase 'on the opposite side' indicates that while previous discussions focused on the obligation to 'provide' security, this section shifts to the perspective of the creditor 'receiving' security from others.
  2. §39.2.11.pridemque etiam de eo cauendum qui non a domino emit — The pronoun 'idem' (neuter accusative singular) refers to the preceding clause 'inutiliter caueri' (security is provided to no purpose). The phrase 'de eo... cauendum' functions either as an impersonal gerundive or an infinitive clause 'de eo... cauendum esse' dependent on 'ait Marcellus', meaning 'the same must be said of providing security for one who bought from a non-owner.'
  3. §39.2.11.prcommitti stipulationem — The verb 'committi' is a technical legal term meaning that the condition of the stipulation is fulfilled, thereby giving rise to an actionable claim or forfeiture of the security.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §39.2.11.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:39.2.11.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.