[PAULUS libro tertio decimo ad edictum. ] §4.8.19.prQualem autem sententiam dicat arbiter, ad praetorem non pertinere Labeo ait, dummodo dicat quod ipsi uidetur.
[PAULUS in his thirteenth book on the Edict.] Labeo says that it does not concern the praetor what kind of award the arbitrator pronounces, provided that he pronounces what seems good to himself.
et ideo si sic fuit in arbitrum compromissum, ut certam sententiam dicat, nullum esse arbitrium, nec cogendum sententiam dicere Iulianus scribit libro quarto digestorum.
And therefore, if an arbitration agreement was made to an arbitrator in such terms that he should pronounce a predetermined award, Julian writes in the fourth book of his Digests that the arbitration is null, and that he is not to be compelled to pronounce an award.
§4.8.19.1Diccre autem sententiam existimamus eum, qui ea mente quid pronuntiat, ut secundum id discedere eos a tota controuersia uelit.
We think, moreover, that he pronounces an award who declares something with the intention that he wishes them to depart from the whole controversy in accordance with it.
sed si de pluribus rebus sit arbiterium receptum, nisi omnes controuersias finierit, non uidetur dicta sententia, sed adhuc erit a practore cogendus.
But if the arbitration has been accepted concerning several matters, unless he has ended all the controversies, an award does not seem to have been pronounced, but he will still have to be compelled by the praetor.
§4.8.19.2Unde uidendum erit, an mutare sententiam possit.
Hence it will have to be seen whether he can change his award.
et alias quidem est agitatum, si arbiter iussit dari, mox uetuit, utrum eo quod iussit an eo quod uetuit stari debeat.
And indeed, on another occasion it was debated, if an arbitrator ordered something to be given, and soon after forbade it, whether one must abide by what he ordered or what he forbade.
et Sabinus quidem putauit posse.
And Sabinus indeed thought that he could change it.
Cassius sententiam magistri sui bene excusat et ait Sabinum non de ea sensisse sententia, quae arbitrium finiat, sed de praeparatione causae: ut puta si iussit litigatores calendis adesse, mox idibus iubeat: nam mutare eum diem posse.
Cassius well defends the opinion of his teacher, and says that Sabinus did not mean that award which ends the arbitration, but rather the preparation of the case: as, for example, if he ordered the litigants to be present on the Calends, and soon after should order them to be present on the Ides; for he can change that day.
ceterum si condemnauit uel absoluit, dum arbiter esse desierit, mutare sententiam non posse,
But if he has condemned or acquitted, since he has ceased to be arbitrator, he cannot change his award.