Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §39.6.37.pr-39.6.37.1

Analogy of Gifts Mortis Causa to Legacies and Sale of Gifts

Passage 6287 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Ulpian states the general rule that donations mortis causa should be treated analogously to legacies, and cites Julian to explain the legal recovery of a sold slave given mortis causa.

[IDEM libro quinto decimo ad legem Iuliam et Papiam. ] §39.6.37.prIllud generaliter meminisse oportebit donationes mortis causa factas legatis comparatas: quodcumque igitur in legatis iuris est, id in mortis causa donationibus erit accipiendum.
[THE SAME, On the Lex Iulia et Papia, Book 15.] It will be necessary to remember generally that donations made mortis causa are compared to legacies: therefore, whatever law exists in the case of legacies must be accepted in the case of donations mortis causa.
§39.6.37.1Iulianus ait: si quis seruum mortis causa sibi donatum uendiderit et hoc uiuo donatore fecerit, pretii condictionem donator habebit, si conualuisset et hoc donator elegerit.
Julian says: if anyone has sold a slave donated to him mortis causa, and has done this while the donor was alive, the donor will have a condictio for the price, if he should have recovered and the donor chose this.
alioquin et ipsum seruum restituere compellitur.
Otherwise, [the recipient] is compelled to restore the slave himself as well.

Notes

  1. §39.6.37.prIllud — The demonstrative pronoun `Illud` serves a proleptic function, anticipating the subsequent accusative with infinitive clause `donationes mortis causa factas legatis comparatas [esse]` (that donations made mortis causa are compared to legacies).
  2. §39.6.37.1conualuisset — The subjunctive pluperfect is used. In the conditional clause (si-clause), it expresses a prior relationship relative to the future tense `habebit` in the main clause (a completed future condition shifted to a past perspective), indicating the condition 'if he should have recovered'.
  3. §39.6.37.1compellitur — Although the verb is in the passive third-person singular, its subject is not explicitly stated. It should be understood by supplying `quis` (the recipient who sold the slave) from the conditional clause.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §39.6.37.pr-39.6.37.1. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:39.6.37.pr-39.6.37.1

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.