Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §4.2.21.pr-4.2.21.6

Praetorian Remedies for Various Acts Done under Duress

Passage 659 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Paulus explains the application of the praetorian edict and remedies regarding various acts performed out of fear, including transactions to maintain status, transfer of possession of another's land, dowry promises, withdrawal from contracts, and acceptance or rejection of inheritances.

[PAULUS libro undecimo ad edictum. ] §4.2.21.prSi mulier contra patronum suum ingrata facta sciens se ingratam, cum de suo statu periclitabatur, aliquid patrono dederit uel promiserit, ne in seruitutem redigatur: cessat edictum, quia hunc sibi metum ipsa infert.
[PAULUS, Book XI on the Edict.] If a woman who has become ungrateful toward her patron, knowing herself to be ungrateful, should give or promise something to her patron when her status was at risk, so that she might not be reduced to slavery: the edict does not apply, because she herself brings this fear upon herself.
§4.2.21.1Quod metus causa gestum erit, nullo tempore praetor ratum habebit.
What has been done because of fear, the praetor will at no time hold valid.
§4.2.21.2Qui possessionem non sui fundi tradidit, non quanti fundus, sed quanti possessio est, eius quadruplum uel simplum cum fructibus consequetur: aestimatur enim quod restitui oportet, id est quod abest: abest autem nuda possessio cum suis fructibus.
He who has delivered the possession of land that is not his own will recover, not the value of the land, but the value of the possession, fourfold or single-fold with the fruits: for that which ought to be restored, that is, what is missing, is valued; and what is missing is the bare possession with its fruits.
quod et Pomponius.
Pomponius also holds this view.
§4.2.21.3Si dos metu promissa sit, non puto nasci obligationem, quia est uerissimum nec talem promissionem dotis ullam esse.
If a dowry has been promised because of fear, I do not think an obligation arises, because it is most true that there is no such promise of a dowry at all.
§4.2.21.4Si metu coactus sim ab emptione locatione discedere, uidendum est, an nihil sit acti et antiqua obligatio remaneat, an hoc simile sit acceptilationi, quia nulla ex bonae fidei obligatione possimus niti, cum finita sit dum amittitur: et magis est ut similis species acceptilationis sit, et ideo praetoria actio nascitur.
If I have been forced by fear to withdraw from a purchase and lease, we must consider whether nothing has been done and the old obligation remains, or whether this is similar to a release, because we cannot rely on any obligation of good faith when it has ended upon being lost: and it is more reasonable that it is a similar kind of release, and therefore a praetorian action arises.
§4.2.21.5Si metu coactus adii hereditatem, puto me heredem effici, quia quamuis si liberum esset noluissem, tamen coactus uolui: sed per praetorem restituendus sum, ut abstinendi mihi potestas tribuatur.
If, forced by fear, I have entered upon an inheritance, I think that I am made heir, because although I would have been unwilling if I had been free, yet under compulsion I willed it: but I ought to be restored by the praetor, so that the power of abstaining may be granted to me.
§4.2.21.6Si coactus hereditatem repudiem, duplici uia praetor mihi succurrit aut utiles actiones quasi heredi dando aut actionem metus causa praestando, ut quam uiam ego elegerim, haec mihi pateat.
If, under compulsion, I reject an inheritance, the praetor comes to my aid in a twofold way, either by granting beneficial actions as if to an heir, or by providing an action on the ground of fear, so that whichever path I choose, this may be open to me.

Notes

  1. 4.2.21.prsciens se ingratam — The present participle "sciens" (knowing) governs the accusative with infinitive clause "se ingratam [esse]" (that she is ungrateful). The accusative "se" is the reflexive pronoun referring to the subject of the main clause, "mulier".
  2. 4.2.21.2quod et Pomponius — The main verb is omitted and should be supplied as "quod et Pomponius sentit" (which Pomponius also thinks) or "quod et Pomponius scribit" (which Pomponius also writes). The relative pronoun "quod" in the neuter nominative refers to the entire content of the preceding sentence.
  3. 4.2.21.4nihil sit acti — The perfect passive participle "actus" in the neuter genitive singular "acti" functions as a partitive genitive qualifying the neuter noun "nihil" (nothing). The phrase indicates the legal state where "nothing has been done" (i.e., the transaction is void).
  4. 4.2.21.5coactus uolui — In contrast with the counterfactual clause introduced by the concessive adverb "quamuis" (noluissem, subjunctive pluperfect), the perfect indicative "uolui" expresses that "although coerced, I willed it," illustrating the highly famous Roman legal maxim that a coerced will is nevertheless a valid legal will.
  5. 4.2.21.6quam uiam ego elegerim, haec mihi pateat — A structural inversion (a type of prolepsis) where the relative clause containing the noun is placed at the beginning, and its referent is anticipated by the demonstrative pronoun "haec" in the main clause. In simpler word order, it corresponds to "haec uia, quam ego elegerim, mihi pateat".

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §4.2.21.pr-4.2.21.6. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:4.2.21.pr-4.2.21.6

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.