[PAULUS libro undecimo ad edictum. ] §4.4.23.prCum mandatu patris filius familias res administraret, non habet beneficium restitutionis: nam et si alius ei mandasset, non succurreretur, cum eo modo maiori potius consuleretur, cuius damno res sit cessura.
[PAULUS in the eleventh book on the Edict.] When a filius familias administers property by the mandate of his father, he does not have the benefit of restitution: for even if another person had mandated him, relief would not be granted, since in that way consultation would rather be had for the benefit of the adult, to whose loss the matter would redound.
sed si euentu damnum minor passurus sit, quia quod praestiterit seruare ab eo cuius negotia gessit non potest, quia is non erit soluendo, sine dubio praetor interueniet.
But if in the event the minor is to suffer loss, because he cannot recover what he has performed from the person whose business he managed, because that person is insolvent, the praetor will without doubt intervene.
si autem ipse dominus minor sit, procurator uero maioris aetatis, non potest facile dominus audiri, nisi si mandatu eius gestum erit nec a procuratore seruari res possit.
But if the principal himself is a minor, while the procurator is of full age, the principal cannot easily be heard, unless the transaction was carried out by his mandate and the property cannot be recovered from the procurator.
ergo et si procuratorio nomine minor circumscriptus sit, imputari debet hoc domino, qui tali commisit sua negotia.
Therefore, even if a minor is defrauded in the name of a procurator, this must be imputed to the principal, who committed his business to such a person.
Idque et Marcello placet.
And this is also approved by Marcellus.