Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §42.1.59.pr-42.1.59.3

Specification of Sums and Judgments Rendered Posthumously

Passage 6911 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This passage explains the criteria for specifying sums in judgments, the invalidity of indefinite condemnations regarding interest, and the invalidity of judgments based on a peremptory edict after the defendant's death.

[IDEM libro quarto de omnibus tribunalibus. ] §42.1.59.prIn summa sufficiet, si expresserit iudex summam in sententia soluique iusserit uel praestari uel quo alio uerbo hoc significauerit.
[THE SAME, in the fourth book On All Tribunals.] In short, it will be sufficient if the judge has expressed the amount in the judgment and ordered it to be paid or performed, or has signified this by some other word.
§42.1.59.1Amplius est rescriptum, etsi in sententia non sit summa adiecta, si tamen is qui petit summam expresserit et iudex ait: 'solue, quod petitum est' uel 'quantum petitum est', ualere sententiam.
Furthermore, it has been rescribed that, even if the amount is not added in the judgment, if the claimant has nevertheless expressed the amount and the judge says "pay what has been claimed" or "as much as has been claimed," the judgment is valid.
§42.1.59.2Qui sortis quidem condemnationem faciunt, de usuris autem ita pronuntiant 'usurae si quae competunt' uel 'quae competunt, ut praestentur', non recte pronuntiant: debent enim de usuris quoque cognoscere et certam facere condemnationem.
Those who make a condemnation of the principal indeed, but pronounce regarding interest in this way, "if any interest is due" or "such as is due, that it be performed," do not pronounce correctly; for they ought to investigate concerning the interest as well and make the condemnation definite.
§42.1.59.3Si quis ex edicto peremptorio post mortem sit condemnatus, non ualet sententia, quia morte rei peremptorium soluitur.
If anyone has been condemned after death based on a peremptory edict, the judgment is not valid, because the peremptory edict is dissolved by the death of the defendant.
ideoque, ut in re integra, de causa notio praestabitur et quod optimum patuerit, statuetur.
And therefore, as if in an intact matter, an investigation of the case will be provided and what appears best will be determined.

Notes

  1. §42.1.59.prsoluique iusserit uel praestari — The verbs 'solui' (to be paid) and 'praestari' (to be performed) are present passive infinitives forming an accusative-with-infinitive construction with the preceding 'summam' as their subject, acting as the object of 'iusserit'.
  2. §42.1.59.1ualere sententiam — An accusative-with-infinitive clause serving as the subject of 'rescriptum est'. Although separated from the main verb by the long conditional 'etsi' and 'si' clauses, it expresses the core substance of the rescript (that the judgment is valid).
  3. §42.1.59.3ut in re integra — Meaning 'as if in an untouched matter.' Since the judgment or peremptory edict has been invalidated by the death of the defendant, the case returns to a state where no legal action has yet had effect, starting anew.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §42.1.59.pr-42.1.59.3. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:42.1.59.pr-42.1.59.3

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.