Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §44.3.15.pr-44.3.15.6

Completion of Usucapion and Accession of Possession

Passage 7259 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

The text regulates the requirements for completing usucapion on the final day and the rules governing the addition of possession periods in transactions involving agents, dependents, tutors, curators, and heirs.

[UENULEIUS libro quinto interdictorum. ] §44.3.15.prIn usucapione ita seruatur, ut, etiamsi minimo momento nouissimi diei possessa sit res, nihilo minus repleatur usucapio, nec totus dies exigitur ad explendum constitutum tempus.
[VENULEIUS, from the fifth book on interdicts] In usucapion it is observed that, even if the thing has been possessed for only the shortest moment of the last day, the usucapion is nevertheless completed, and the whole day is not required to fill the established time.
§44.3.15.1Accessio possessionis fit non solum temporis, quod apud eum fuit, unde is emit, sed et qui ei uendidit, unde tu emisti.
The addition of possession occurs not only of the time which was with him from whom he bought, but also of him who sold to the one from whom you bought.
sed si medius aliquis ex auctoribus non possederit, praecedentium auctorum possessio non proderit, quia coniuncta non est, sicut nec ei, qui non possidet, auctoris possessio accedere potest.
But if any intermediate predecessor did not possess, the possession of the preceding predecessors will be of no benefit, because it is not continuous, just as the possession of a predecessor cannot be added to one who does not possess.
§44.3.15.2Item adiciendum est, unde emisti, aut unde is emit, cui tu emendum mandaueras, et quod apud eum, qui uendendum mandauit.
Likewise, there must be added the time with him from whom you bought, or from whom he bought to whom you had given a mandate to buy, and the time with him who gave a mandate to sell.
quod si is quoque, cui mandatum erat, alii uendendum mandauerit, non aliter huius, qui postea mandauerat, dandam accessionem Labeo ait, quam si id ipsum dominus ei permiserit.
But if he also, to whom the mandate had been given, gave a mandate to another to sell, Labeo says that the addition of this person, who later gave the mandate, is not to be given unless the owner permitted him that very thing.
§44.3.15.3Sed et si a filio uel seruo rem emero, accessio temporis et quo apud patrem aut dominum fuit ita danda est mihi, si aut uoluntate patris dominiue aut cum administrationem peculii haberet uendidit.
But even if I buy a thing from a son or a slave, the addition of the time that was with the father or master is to be given to me only if he sold either by the will of the father or master, or when he had the administration of his peculium.
§44.3.15.4Item danda est accessio cum eo, quod apud pupillum fuit, a cuius tutore, cum is tutelam eius administraret, emisti.
Likewise, the addition must be given with that which was with a pupil, when you bought from his tutor while he was administering the tutelage.
idemque in eo, qui a curatore pupilli furiosiue emerit, seruandum est: et si uentris nomine aut eius, quae rei seruandae causa in possessione esset dotis suae nomine, deminutio facta sit: nam id quoque temporis accedit.
And the same must be observed in the case of one who buys from the curator of a pupil or a madman; and if a disposal of the property was made in the name of an unborn child (uentris nomine) or of a woman who was in possession for the purpose of preserving property in the name of her dowry; for that time also is added.
§44.3.15.5Hae autem accessiones non tam late accipiendae sunt quam uerba earum patent, ut etiam, si post uenditionem traditionemque rei traditae apud uenditorem res fuerit, proficiat id tempus emptori, sed illud solum quod ante fuit, licet uenditionis tempore eam rem uenditor non habuerat.
However, these additions are not to be accepted as broadly as their words seem to extend, so that even if the thing, after sale and delivery, was with the seller, that time would benefit the buyer; but only that time which was before benefits him, although at the time of the sale the seller did not have the thing.
§44.3.15.6Ei, cui heres rem hereditariam uendidit, et heredis tempus et defuncti debet accedere.
To him to whom an heir has sold a hereditary thing, both the time of the heir and of the deceased ought to be added.

Notes

  1. 44.3.15.prut, etiamsi minimo momento nouissimi diei possessa sit res, nihilo minus repleatur usucapio, nec totus dies exigitur — The clause `ut... repleatur` is a noun clause introduced by `ut` which depends on the main verb `ita seruatur` (it is observed in such a way that...), expressing the content of the rule. Inside this, the concessive clause `etiamsi... possessa sit` (even if... has been possessed) is embedded. It explains the legal rule that the completion of usucapion does not require the entire final day to expire; rather, possession during any moment of that last day is sufficient.
  2. 44.3.15.1sed si medius aliquis ex auctoribus non possederit... quia coniuncta non est — The phrase `medius aliquis ex auctoribus` means "any intermediate predecessor" in the chain of succession. `coniuncta` refers to the continuity of possession. If even a single intermediate predecessor did not possess the thing, the continuity of possession is broken (not continuous), and the current possessor cannot add (accessio) the possession periods of the preceding predecessors.
  3. 44.3.15.2non aliter huius, qui postea mandauerat, dandam accessionem Labeo ait, quam si id ipsum dominus ei permiserit. — The sentence employs the construction `non aliter... quam si...` (not otherwise... than if...). `dandam [esse]` is a gerundive within the Accusative with Infinitive construction governed by `Labeo ait`, with `accessionem` as its subject. The genitive `huius, qui postea mandauerat` (of this person who later mandated, i.e., the first agent who delegated the mandate to another) modifies `accessionem`. This indicates that the addition of possession is only granted if the owner had permitted the agent to make such a delegation.
  4. 44.3.15.4et si uentris nomine aut eius, quae rei seruandae causa in possessione esset dotis suae nomine, deminutio facta sit — Both `uentris nomine` (in the name of the unborn child) and `eius... dotis suae nomine` (of her who was in possession in the name of her dowry for the preservation of property) designate situations of possession granted by magisterial decree (missio in possessionem). `deminutio facta sit` refers to the "diminution" or disposal/alienation of the property. This specifies that even when the property was disposed of under such special types of possession, that period of possession is still added to the buyer's usucapion time.
  5. 44.3.15.5ut etiam, si post uenditionem traditionemque rei traditae apud uenditorem res fuerit, proficiat id tempus emptori, sed illud solum quod ante fuit — This explains the inner structure of the `ut`-clause (which limits the scope of the rule). The initial statement `ut... proficiat id tempus emptori` (so that that time would benefit the buyer) is strongly contrasted with the subsequent clause `sed illud solum [tempus proficit] quod ante fuit` (but only that time which was before benefits him). The concessive clause `licet... non habuerat` (although at the time of sale the seller did not have the thing) clarifies that while any possession by the seller *after* the sale and delivery cannot be added, the possession *before* the sale can indeed be added, even if the seller did not temporarily hold the thing at the exact moment of the transaction.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §44.3.15.pr-44.3.15.6. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:44.3.15.pr-44.3.15.6

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.