[IDEM libro quinquagensimo primo ad edictum. ] §40.12.24.prOrdinata liberali causa liberi loco habetur is, qui de statu suo litigat, ita ut aduersus eum quoque, qui se dominum esse dicit, actiones ei non denegentur, quascumque intendere uelit: quid enim si quae tales sint, ut tempore aut morte intereant? quare non concedatur ei litem contestando in tutum eas redigere?
[THE SAME, on the Edict, book fifty-one.] Once a lawsuit concerning freedom has been instituted, he who is litigating over his status is treated as a free man, so that even against him who claims to be his master, no actions which he may wish to bring are denied him; for what if there are some actions of such a nature that they perish by lapse of time or by death? Why, then, should he not be permitted to secure them by joining issue in the case?
§40.12.24.1Quin etiam Seruius ait in actionibus annuis ex eo tempore annum cedere, ex quo lis ordinata sit.
Furthermore, Servius says that in annual actions, the year begins to run from the time when the lawsuit has been instituted.
§40.12.24.2Sed si cum aliis experiri uelit, non est quaerendum, an lis ordinata sit, ne inueniatur ratio, quemadmodum subiecto aliquo, qui libertati controuersiam moueat, interim actiones excludantur: aeque enim ex euentu iudicii liberalis aut utilis aut inanis actio eius efficietur.
But if he wishes to try his fortune against others, there is no need to inquire whether the lawsuit has been instituted, lest a method be found whereby, by putting forward someone to dispute his freedom, his actions may in the meantime be excluded; for his action will be rendered either useful or void equally from the outcome of the lawsuit concerning freedom.
§40.12.24.3Sed si quas actiones inferat dominus, quaeritur, an compellendus sit suscipere iudicium.
But if the master should bring any actions, the question is raised whether he ought to be compelled to accept the trial.
et plerique existimant, si in personam agat, suscipere ipsum ad litis contestationem, sed sustinendum iudicium, donec de libertate iudicetur: nec uideri praeiudicium libertati fieri aut uoluntate domini in libertate eum morari: nam ordinato liberali iudicio interim pro libero habetur, et sicut ipse agere, ita cum ipso quoque agi potest.
And most jurists think that, if the master brings an action in personam, he himself must accept it up to the joinder of issue, but the trial must be suspended until judgment is given concerning his freedom; nor is it considered that a prejudice is done to his freedom, or that he remains in freedom by the will of his master. For once the lawsuit concerning freedom is instituted, he is in the meantime treated as a free man, and just as he himself can bring an action, so also can an action be brought against him.
ceterum ex euentu aut utile iudicium erit aut nullum, si contra libertatem pronuntiatum fuerit.
Moreover, depending on the outcome, the trial will either be useful or null, if judgment is pronounced against his freedom.
§40.12.24.4Si is, qui in libertatem proclamat, furti aut damni iniuria ab aliquo arguatur, Mela ait interim eum cauere debere iudicio se sisti, ne melioris condicionis sit qui dubiae libertatis est, quam qui certae: sed sustinendum iudicium, ne praeiudicium libertati fiat.
If he who is claiming his freedom is accused by anyone of theft or unlawful damage, Mela says that he must in the meantime give security for his appearance in court, lest he whose freedom is doubtful be in a better position than he whose freedom is certain; but the trial must be suspended, lest a prejudice be done to his freedom.
aeque si cum possessore hominis furti agi coeperit, deinde is, cuius nomine agebatur, in libertatem proclamauerit, sustinendum iudicium, ut, si liber iudicatus sit, in ipsum transferatur iudicium: et, si damnatio facta sit, iudicati actionem potius in eum dandam.
Likewise, if an action for theft has begun to be brought against the possessor of a man, and thereafter the person on whose account the action was being brought claims his freedom, the trial must be suspended, so that, if he is judged to be free, the trial may be transferred against him; and, if a condemnation has been made, the action on the judgment should rather be given against him.