Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §39.2.28.pr

Reinforcement Costs and Tenant Departure under Justified Fear

Passage 6152 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Discusses the claims for building reinforcement expenses and losses due to the departure of tenants under the stipulation for threatened damage, including the requirement of a justified fear.

[ULPIANUS libro octogensimo primo ad edictum. ] §39.2.28.prIn hac stipulatione uenit, quanti ea res erit.
[ULPIANUS in the eighty-first book on the Edict.] In this stipulation, the question is how much the interest will be.
et ideo Cassius scribit eum, qui damni infecti stipulatus est, si propter metum ruinae ea aedificia, quorum nomine sibi cauit, fulsit, impensas eius rei ex stipulatu consequi posse: idemque iuris esse, cum propter uitium communis parietis qui cauit sibi damni infecti, onerum eorum releuandorum gratia, quae in parietem incumbunt, aedificia sua fulsit.
And therefore Cassius writes that a person who has stipulated for security against threatened damage can, if through fear of ruin he has shored up those buildings on account of which security was given to him, recover the expenses of that work on the basis of the stipulation; and that the same rule of law applies when, because of a defect in a common wall, a person who has secured himself against threatened damage has shored up his own buildings for the sake of relieving those loads which press upon the wall.
in eadem causa est detrimentum quoque propter emigrationem inquilinorum, quod ex iusto metu factum est.
In the same position is also the loss due to the departure of tenants, which has occurred from a justified fear.
Aristo autem non male adicit, sicuti hic exigit Cassius, ut si iustus metus migrandi causam praebuerit, ita in eius personam qui fulsit eadem Cassium dicere debuisse, si iusto metu ruinae fulcire coactus est.
Aristo, however, not without reason adds that, just as Cassius here requires that a justified fear should have provided the cause for moving, so Cassius ought to have said the same in the case of the person who shored up, if he was compelled to shore up by a justified fear of ruin.

Notes

  1. §39.2.28.prquanti ea res erit — An indirect question acting as the subject of `uenit`. `quanti` is a genitive of value.
  2. §39.2.28.preum ... posse — An accusative-and-infinitive (A.C.I.) construction depending on `Cassius scribit`. `eum` is the subject accusative of `posse`. The structure is interrupted by the insertion of the relative clause `qui...` and the conditional clause `si...` after `eum`.
  3. §39.2.28.pronerum eorum releuandorum gratia — A gerundive construction with the postposition `gratia` (for the sake of, governing the genitive). The noun `onerum` agrees in gender, number, and case with the gerundive `releuandorum`.
  4. §39.2.28.preadem Cassium dicere debuisse — An accusative-and-infinitive construction within the `ut`-clause dependent on `Aristo ... adicit`. `Cassium` is the subject accusative of `debuisse` (ought to have), and `eadem` (the same things, neuter plural accusative) is the direct object of `dicere`.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §39.2.28.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:39.2.28.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.