[PAULUS libro quinquagensimo quarto ad edictum. ] §41.4.2.9Procuratorem quoque, qui ex auctione, quam mandatu domini facit, emerit, plerique putant utilitatis causa pro emptore usucapturum.
Most also think that a procurator, who buys from an auction which he conducts by mandate of his principal, will acquire by usucapion as a purchaser for the sake of utility.
idem potest dici et si negotia domini gerens ignorantis emerit propter eandem utilitatem.
The same can be said also if one managing the affairs of an owner without his knowledge buys, on account of the same utility.
§41.4.2.10Si seruus tuus peculiari nomine emat rem, quam scit alienam, licet tu ignores alienam esse, tamen usu non capies.
If your slave, in the name of his peculium, buys a thing which he knows belongs to another, even though you are ignorant that it belongs to another, you will nevertheless not acquire it by usucapion.
§41.4.2.11Celsus scribit, si seruus meus peculiari nomine apiscatur possessionem, id etiam ignorantem me usucapere: quod si non peculiari nomine, non nisi scientem me: et si uitiose coeperit possidere, meam uitiosam esse possessionem.
Celsus writes that if my slave obtains possession in the name of his peculium, I acquire by usucapion even if I am ignorant of it; but if not in the name of his peculium, only if I know of it; and if he began to possess with a defect, my possession is also defective.
§41.4.2.12Pomponius quoque in his, quae nomine domini possideantur, domini potius quam serui uoluntatem spectandam ait: quod si peculiari, tunc mentem serui quaerendam.
Pomponius also says that in those things which are possessed in the name of the master, the will of the master rather than of the slave is to be inspected; but if in the name of the peculium, then the mind of the slave is to be inquired into.
et si seruus mala fide possideat eaque dominus nanctus sit, ut suo nomine possideat, adempto puta peculio, dicendum est, ut eadem causa sit possessionis et ideo usucapio ei non magis procedat.
And if the slave possesses in bad faith and the master has obtained those things so that he may possess in his own name—suppose, for instance, the peculium was taken away—it must be said that the cause of possession remains the same, and therefore usucapion does not proceed for him any further.
§41.4.2.13Si seruus bona fide emerit peculiari nomine, ego ubi primum cognoui sciam alienam, processuram usucapionem Celsus ait: initium enim possessionis sine uitio fuisse: sed si eo tempore quo emit, quamquam id bona fide faciat, ego alienam rem esse sciam, usu me non capturum.
If a slave bought in good faith in the name of his peculium, and as soon as I first learned of it, I knew it belonged to another, Celsus says that usucapion will proceed, for the beginning of possession was without defect; but if at the time he bought, although he did so in good faith, I knew it was another's thing, I will not acquire it by usucapion.
§41.4.2.14Et si quod non bona fide seruus meus emerit, in pactionem libertatis mihi dederit, non ideo me magis usucapturum: durare enim primam causam possessionis idem Celsus ait.
And if my slave bought something not in good faith, and gave it to me in an agreement for his freedom, I will not therefore acquire it by usucapion any the more, for the same Celsus says that the first cause of possession endures.
§41.4.2.15Si a pupillo emero sine tutoris auctoritate, quem puberem esse putem, dicimus usucapionem sequi, ut hic plus sit in re quam in existimatione: quod si scias pupillum esse, putes tamen pupillis licere res suas sine tutoris auctoritate administrare, non capies usu, quia iuris error nulli prodest.
If I buy without the authority of a tutor from a ward whom I think to be of pubertal age, we say that usucapion follows, so that here there is more in the reality than in the opinion; but if you know he is a ward, yet think that wards are allowed to administer their own affairs without the authority of a tutor, you will not acquire by usucapion, because an error of law profits no one.
§41.4.2.16Si a furioso, quem putem sanae mentis, emero, constitit usucapere utilitatis causa me posse, quamuis nulla esset emptio et ideo neque de euictione actio nascitur mihi nec Publiciana competit nec accessio possessionis.
If I buy from a madman whom I think to be of sound mind, it is established that I can acquire by usucapion for the sake of utility, although the sale was void, and therefore neither does an action on eviction arise for me, nor does the Publician action apply, nor the accession of possession.
§41.4.2.17Si eam rem, quam pro emptore usucapiebas, scienti mihi alienam esse uendideris, non capiam usu.
If you sell that thing which you were acquiring by usucapion as a purchaser to me who know it belongs to another, I will not acquire it by usucapion.
§41.4.2.18Etiam heredi ulteriori defuncti possessio proderit, quamuis medius heres possessionem eius nanctus non sit.
Even a further heir will benefit from the possession of the deceased, although an intermediate heir has not obtained possession of it.
§41.4.2.19Si defunctus bona fide emerit, usucapietur res, quamuis heres scit alienam esse.
If the deceased bought in good faith, the thing will be acquired by usucapion, although the heir knows it belongs to another.
hoc et in bonorum possessore et in fideicommissariis, quibus ex Trebelliano restituitur hereditas, ceterisque praetoriis successoribus obseruatum est.
This is observed also in the case of a possessor of goods, and in fideicommissaries to whom the inheritance is restored under the Trebellian decree, and other praetorian successors.
§41.4.2.20Emptori tempus uenditoris ad usucapionem procedit.
For the purchaser, the time of the seller proceeds toward usucapion.
§41.4.2.21Si rem alienam emero et, cum usucaperem, eandem rem dominus a me petierit, non interpellari usucapionem meam litis contestatione.
If I buy a thing belonging to another, and while I am acquiring it by usucapion, the owner sues me for the same thing, my usucapion is not interrupted by the joinder of issue.
sed si litis aestimationem sufferre maluerim, ait Iulianus causam possessionis mutari ei, qui litis aestimationem sustulerit, idemque esse, si dominus ei, qui rem emisset a non domino, donasset: eaque sententia uera est.
But if I prefer to bear the assessment of the suit, Julian says that the cause of possession is changed for him who has borne the assessment of the suit, and it is the same as if the owner had made a gift to him who had bought the thing from a non-owner; and this opinion is true.