Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §44.2.31.pr

Res Judicata in Personal Actions After Losing an Action in Rem

Passage 7244 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Presents the opinion of Paulus that a plaintiff who lost an action in rem is not barred by the defense of res judicata from subsequently bringing a personal action (condictio) regarding the same matter.

[IDEM libro tertio responsorum. ] §44.2.31.prPaulus respondit ei, qui in rem egisset nec tenuisset, postea condicenti non obstare exceptionem rei iudicatae.
[THE SAME, Opinions, book three] Paulus replied that the defense of res judicata does not block a person who, having brought an action in rem, did not prevail, when he subsequently brings a condictio.

Notes

  1. §44.2.31.prei, qui in rem egisset nec tenuisset, postea condicenti — The dative pronoun `ei` is modified both by the relative clause `qui in rem egisset nec tenuisset` and the present participle `condicenti`. The verb `tenere` (here `tenuisset`) is used in a technical legal sense meaning "to win the case" or "to prevail." The subsequent action `condicere` (represented by `condicenti`) refers to bringing a personal action (*condictio*), which is based on a different legal ground (*causa*) than the prior action in rem.
  2. §44.2.31.prnon obstare exceptionem — This is an accusative and infinitive construction (*accusativus cum infinitivo*) introduced by the main verb `respondit`, where `exceptionem` (accusative) functions as the subject of the infinitive `obstare`.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §44.2.31.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:44.2.31.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.