Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §44.2.6.pr

Rationale for the Plea of Res Judicata and Single Action

Passage 7219 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Paulus explains that for each controversy, a single action and judgment suffice to prevent endless litigation and contradictory decisions, which is why the plea of res judicata commonly arises.

[PAULUS libro septuagensimo ad edictum. ] §44.2.6.prSingulis controuersiis singulas actiones unumque iudicati finem sufficere probabili ratione placuit, ne aliter modus litium multiplicatus summam atque inexplicabilem faciat difficultatem, maxime si diuersa pronuntiarentur.
[PAULUS, in the seventieth book on the Edict.] It has been approved for a plausible reason that for individual controversies individual actions and a single end of judgment should suffice, lest otherwise the multiplied quantity of lawsuits should cause a supreme and inexplicable difficulty, especially if contradictory decisions were to be pronounced.
parere ergo exceptionem rei iudicatae frequens est.
Therefore, it is common for the exception of res judicata to arise.

Notes

  1. §44.2.6.prSingulis controuersiis — Dative case governed by the intransitive verb `sufficere` (to suffice).
  2. §44.2.6.prmodus litium multiplicatus — `modus` here means "quantity, measure, or scale" rather than "limit" or "restriction". Thus, the phrase means "the multiplied quantity of lawsuits."
  3. §44.2.6.prparere — This is the present infinitive of the third-conjugation verb `parere` (`pario`, to produce, bring forth), not the second-conjugation `pārēre` (to obey). This infinitive clause, taking `exceptionem` as its object, serves as the subject of `frequens est`.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §44.2.6.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:44.2.6.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.