Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §44.2.17.pr

Resumed Possession and Inapplicability of Res Judicata

Passage 7230 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Gaius explains that if a defendant is acquitted because they ceased to possess the property, but later regains possession, the plaintiff's subsequent claim is not barred by the exception of res judicata.

[GAIUS libro trigensimo ad edictum prouinciale. ] §44.2.17.prSi rem meam a te petiero, tu autem ideo fueris absolutus, quod probaueris sine dolo malo te desisse possidere, deinde postea coeperis possidere et ego a te petam: non nocebit mihi exceptio rei iudicatae.
[GAIUS, on the provincial edict, book thirty.] If I claim my property from you, and you are acquitted for the reason that you proved that you ceased to possess it without malice, and then afterwards you begin to possess it and I claim it from you: the exception of res judicata will not harm me.

Notes

  1. §44.2.17.prdesisse — A contracted form of the perfect infinitive desivisse from the verb desino (to cease), forming part of the accusative with infinitive construction 'te desisse possidere' (that you ceased to possess).
  2. §44.2.17.prpetam — The tense is future. After a sequence of future perfect verbs (petiero, fueris, probaueris, coeperis) in the si-clause, this verb expresses the final conditional step 'I claim' in the future tense, which corresponds with the future tense 'nocebit' in the main clause.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §44.2.17.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:44.2.17.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.