[ULPIANUS libro tertio decimo ad edictum. ] §4.8.13.prPomponius ait, et si alteri accepto lata sit poena compromissi, non debere eum compelli sententiam dicere.
[ULPIANUS in his thirteenth book on the Edict.] Pomponius says that even if the penalty of the submission to arbitration has been discharged to one of the parties, he (the arbitrator) ought not to be compelled to give his award.
§4.8.13.1Idem Pomponius scribit, si de meis solis controuersiis sit compromissum et de te poenam sim stipulatus, uidendum ne non sit compromissum.
The same Pomponius writes that if the submission to arbitration has been made regarding my disputes alone, and I have stipulated for a penalty from you, we must see whether there is not no submission to arbitration.
sed cui rei moueatur, non uideo: nam si ideo, quia de unius controuersiis solum compromissum est, nulla ratio est: licet enim et de una re compromittere: si uero ideo, quia ex altera dumtaxat parte stipulatio interuenit, est ratio.
But I do not see for what reason he is moved: for if it is for the reason that the submission was made concerning the disputes of one party alone, there is no ground; for it is permitted to submit even a single matter to arbitration. But if it is because the stipulation intervened on one side only, there is a ground.
quamquam si petitor fuit qui stipulatus est, possit dici plenum esse compromissum, quia is qui conuenitur tutus est ueluti pacti exceptione, is qui conuenit, si arbitro non parcatur, habet stipulationem.
Although, if it was the claimant who made the stipulation, it might be said that the submission to arbitration is complete, because the party who is sued is protected, for instance, by an exception of agreement, and the party who sues, if the arbitrator's decision is not obeyed, has the stipulation.
sed id uerum esse non puto: neque enim sufficit exceptionem habere, ut arbiter sententiam dicere cogatur.
But I do not think this is correct; for it is not sufficient to have an exception in order that the arbitrator may be compelled to give his award.
§4.8.13.2Recepisse autem arbitrium uidetur, ut Pedius libro nono dicit, qui iudicis partes suscepit finemque se sua sententia controuersiis impositurum pollicetur.
But he is deemed to have accepted the arbitration, as Pedius says in his ninth book, who has undertaken the role of a judge and promises that he will put an end to the disputes by his award.
quod si, inquit, hactenus interuenit, ut experiretur, an consilio suo uel auctoritate discuti litem paterentur, non uidetur arbitrium recepisse.
But if, he says, his intervention went only so far as to try whether they would allow the lawsuit to be settled by his advice or influence, he is not deemed to have accepted the arbitration.
§4.8.13.3Arbiter ex compromisso his diebus non cogitur sententiam dicere, quibus iudex non cogetur, nisi dies compromissi exitura sit nec proferri possit.
An arbitrator appointed under a submission is not compelled to give his award on those days on which a judge is not compelled to do so, unless the day of the submission to arbitration is about to expire and cannot be extended.
§4.8.13.4Proinde si forte urgueatur a praetore ad sententiam, aequissimum erit, si iuret sibi de causa nondum liquere, spatium ei ad pronuntiandum dari.
Accordingly, if he should happen to be urged by the praetor to give his award, it will be most equitable, if he swears that the case is not yet clear to him, that time be given to him to pronounce his award.