[IDEM libro sexto fideicommissorum. ] §44.6.2.prSi seruus cum emerit scit, ignorauit autem dominus, uel contra, uidendum est, cuius potius spectanda sit scientia.
[THE SAME in the sixth book on Trust Bequests.] If a slave knows when he purchases, but his master was ignorant, or vice versa, we must see whose knowledge should rather be regarded.
et magis est, ut scientia inspicienda sit eius qui comparauit, non eius, cui adquiretur, et ideo poena litigiosi competit, sic tamen, si non mandatu domini emit: nam si mandatu, etiamsi scit seruus, dominus autem ignorauit, scientia non nocet: et ita Iulianus in re litigiosa scribit.
And the better opinion is that the knowledge of the one who purchased is to be inspected, not that of the one for whom it is acquired; and therefore, the penalty for a litigious thing applies, yet only if he did not purchase by the master's mandate. For if he did so by mandate, even if the slave knows, but the master was ignorant, the knowledge does not cause harm; and so Julian writes regarding a litigious thing.