[PAPINIANUS libro uicensimo tertio quaestionum. ] §41.8.3.prnon magis quam si quis emptum existimet, quod non emerit.
[PAPINIANUS, from his twenty-third book of Questions.]...no more than if one should think he has bought what he has not bought.
Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §41.8.3.pr
Denial of Usucapion on Mistaken Sale and Legacy
Summary
Papinian explains that just as usucapion is not allowed when someone mistakenly believes they have bought something they actually have not, it is likewise denied in the case of a mistaken legacy.
Notes
- §41.8.3.prnon magis quam — This phrase refers back to the negative verb phrase non usucapiam in the preceding fragment (D.41.8.2.pr). The comparison implies that just as one cannot acquire by usucapion under the title of buyer (pro emptore) when there was no actual sale, so too one cannot do so under the title of legatee (pro legato) when there was no actual legacy.
- §41.8.3.premptum — The accusative participle represents either an infinitive phrase with esse omitted (emptum esse, 'to have been bought') or a predicative accusative qualifying the omitted antecedent of the relative clause introduced by quod (which would act as the direct object of existimet).
Cite this passage
Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §41.8.3.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:41.8.3.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.