[ULPIANUS libro quinquagensimo tertio ad edictum. ] §39.2.7.prPraetor ait: 'damni infecti suo nomine promitti, alieno satisdari iubebo ei, qui iurauerit non calumniae causa id se postulare eumue cuius nomine aget postulaturum fuisse, in eam diem, quam causa cognita statuero.
[ULPIANUS libro quinquagensimo tertio ad edictum.] The praetor says: 'I will order that, regarding damage not yet done, a promise be made in one's own name, and security be given in another's, to him who has sworn that he does not demand this for the sake of calumnia, or that the person in whose name he acts would have demanded it, until such day as I shall determine after hearing the case.
si controuersia erit, dominus sit nec ne qui cauebit, sub exceptione satisdari iubebo.
If there is a dispute as to whether the person who is to give security is the owner or not, I will order security to be given under an exception.
de eo opere, quod in flumine publico ripaue eius fiet, in annos decem satisdari iubebo.
Regarding work that is to be done in a public river or on its bank, I will order security to be given for ten years.
eum, cui ita non cauebitur, in possessionem eius rei, cuius nomine ut caueatur postulabitur, ire et, cum iusta causa esse uidebitur, etiam possidere iubebo.
I will order him to whom security is not thus given to enter into possession of the property, for which security is demanded, and, when there appears to be a just cause, also to possess it.
in eum, qui neque cauerit neque in possessione esse neque possidere passus erit, iudicium dabo, ut tantum praestet, quantum praestare eum oporteret, si de ea re ex decreto meo eiusue, cuius de ea re iurisdictio fuit quae mea est, cautum fuisset.
Against him who has neither given security, nor allowed the other to be in possession or to possess, I will grant an action for as much as he would have had to pay if security had been given regarding that matter under my decree or that of one who had the same jurisdiction as I have.
eius rei nomine, in cuius possessionem misero, si ab eo, qui in possessione erit, damni infecti nomine satisdabitur, eum, cui non satisdabitur, simul in possessione esse iubebo'. §39.2.7.1Hoc edictum prospicit damno nondum facto, cum ceterae actiones ad damna, quae contigerunt, sarcienda pertineant, ut in legis Aquiliae actione et aliis.
Regarding the property into whose possession I have sent someone, if security under the name of damage not yet done is given by him who is in possession, I will order him to whom security is not given to be in possession together with him.' This edict provides for damage not yet done, whereas other actions relate to repairing damages that have occurred, as in the action under the Lex Aquilia and others.
de damno uero facto nihil edicto cauetur: cum enim animalia, quae noxam commiserunt, non ultra nos solent onerare, quam ut noxae ea dedamus, multo magis ea, quae anima carent, ultra nos non deberent onerare, praesertim cum res quidem animales, quae damnum dederint, ipsae extent, aedes autem, si ruina sua damnum dederunt, desierint extare.
Indeed, concerning damage already done, nothing is provided by the edict: for, since animals that have committed a wrong do not usually burden us beyond our surrendering them for the wrong, much more should those things that lack life not burden us beyond that, especially since animal things that have caused damage still exist themselves, whereas houses, if they have caused damage by their collapse, have ceased to exist.
§39.2.7.2Unde quaeritur, si ante, quam caueretur, aedes deciderunt neque dominus rudera uelit egerere eaque derelinquat, an sit aliqua aduersus eum actio.
Hence it is asked, if before security was given, the house collapsed and the owner does not want to remove the debris and abandons it, whether there is any action against him.
et Iulianus consultus, si prius, quam damni infecti stipulatio interponeretur, aedes uitiosae corruissent, quid facere deberet is, in cuius aedes rudera decidissent, ut damnum sarciretur, respondit, si dominus aedium, quae ruerunt, uellet tollere, non aliter permittendum, quam ut omnia, id est et quae inutilia essent, auferret, nec solum de futuro, sed et de praeterito damno cauere eum debere: quod si dominus aedium, quae deciderunt, nihil facit, interdictum reddendum ei, in cuius aedes rudera decidissent, per quod uicinus compelletur aut tollere aut totas aedes pro derelicto habere.
And Julian, having been consulted as to what he whose house the debris fell onto ought to do so that the damage might be repaired, if the defective house had collapsed before the stipulation for damage not yet done was entered into, replied that if the owner of the house that collapsed wished to remove it, he should not be permitted to do so unless he took away everything, that is, even what was useless, and he ought to give security not only for future but also for past damage; but if the owner of the house that collapsed does nothing, an interdict must be granted to him onto whose house the debris fell, by which the neighbor will be compelled either to remove them or to hold the entire house as abandoned.