Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §41.2.28.pr

Leasing a Thing Already Possessed and Loss of Possession

Passage 6726 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

On the question of whether a person who already possesses a thing loses possession by subsequently leasing it, this passage discusses the relevance of knowledge, intention, and the validity of buying or leasing the possession itself.

[TERTULLIANUS libro primo quaestionum. ] §41.2.28.prSi aliquam rem possideam et eandem postea conducam, an amittam possessionem? multum refert in his, quid agatur: primum enim refert, utrum sciam me possidere an ignorem: et utrum quasi non meam rem conducam an quasi meam: et sciens meam esse, utrum quasi proprietatis respectu an possessionis tantum.
[TERTULLIANUS, in the first book of Questions.] If I possess a certain thing and afterwards lease the same, do I lose possession? In these matters, what is being done is of great importance. For first, it matters whether I know that I possess or am ignorant of it; and whether I lease it as if it were not mine or as if it were mine; and, knowing it to be mine, whether as if in respect of ownership or only of possession.
nam et si rem meam tu possideas et ego emam a te possessionem eius rei uel stipuler, utilis erit et emptio et stipulatio, et sequitur, ut et precarium et conductio specialiter possessionis solius conducendae uel precario rogandae animus interueniat.
For even if you possess my thing and I buy its possession from you or stipulate for it, both the purchase and the stipulation will be valid, and it follows that both permissive occupancy and lease [are valid, provided that] the intention of leasing or asking for permissive occupancy specifically of the possession alone intervenes.

Notes

  1. §41.2.28.pret precarium et conductio — There is a grammatical irregularity (anacoluthon) in this passage. The nominatives 'et precarium et conductio' lack a corresponding predicate verb (such as 'utilia sint' "are valid"), and instead 'animus interueniat' functions as the main verb of the 'ut' clause. Alternatively, it can be interpreted as a scribal error for the ablatives 'et precario et conductione' ("in permissive occupancy and in lease"), meaning "it follows that in permissive occupancy and lease, [the same applies] provided that the intention ... intervenes."
  2. §41.2.28.prpossessionis solius conducendae uel precario rogandae — 'possessionis solius' is a genitive noun phrase modified by the gerundives 'conducendae' and 'rogandae', defining the content of 'animus' (intention). It means "the intention of leasing or asking for permissive occupancy specifically of the possession alone (as opposed to ownership)."

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §41.2.28.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:41.2.28.pr

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.