[IDEM libro sexagensimo nono ad edictum. ] §43.4.4.prPer interdictum etiam ei subuenit praetor, qui damni infecti ab eo in possessionem missus est, ne ei uis fiat.
[THE SAME, on the Edict, book sixty-nine.] By means of an interdict, the praetor also assists a person who has been sent into possession by someone on account of threatened damage, so that violence may not be done to him.
§43.4.4.1Poena autem eius, qui non promittit uel satis non dat, haec est, ut in possessionem mittatur aduersarius.
Moreover, the penalty for one who does not make a promise or does not give security is this: that his adversary is sent into possession.
siue ergo promittat, siue per eum non fiat, quo minus promittat, non tenebit interdictum repulso per exceptionem eo qui experitur.
Therefore, whether he makes the promise, or whether it is not due to him that he does not make the promise, the interdict will not hold, the one who brings the action being repelled by an exception.
§43.4.4.2Praetor in eum, qui neque cauit neque possidere passus est eum qui missus est, iudicium pollicetur in tantum, quantum praestare eum oporteret, si de ea re cautum fuerat.
Against a person who has neither given security nor permitted the one sent to take possession, the praetor promises an action for as much as he would have had to make good if security had been given regarding that matter.
§43.4.4.3Sed et ex alia causa hoc iudicium proposuit, si eo tempore, quo in possessionem mitti desiderabat, praetoris adeundi potestas non fuerit, scilicet ut, si, cum potestas praetoris adeundi non esset, damnum interim datum est, haberet iudicium qui damnum passus est.
But he also proposed this action for another cause: if at the time when he desired to be sent into possession, there was no opportunity of approaching the praetor; namely so that, if, while there was no opportunity of approaching the praetor, damage was caused in the meantime, the one who suffered the damage should have an action.
§43.4.4.4Item subiectum, si ex alia causa in possessionem missus prohibitus esse dicetur, habere in factum actionem.
Likewise, it is subjoined that if a person sent into possession for another cause is said to have been prevented, he has an action on the facts.