Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §45.1.133.pr

Effect of Non-Interference Stipulation on Heirs After Action

Passage 7481 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

The text discusses a stipulation promising that no force will be used by the promisor or his heir, arguing that even after an action is brought for force used by the promisor, the stipulation remains valid for future acts of the heir.

[SCAEUOLA libro tertio decimo quaestionum. ] §45.1.133.prSi sic stipulatus sim: 'neque per te neque per heredem tuum uim fieri spondes?' et egi, quod mihi uim feceris, recte remanere factum heredis in stipulatione.
[SCAEVOLA, Questions, book 13.] If I have stipulated thus: "Do you promise that no force will be used either by you or by your heir?" and I have brought an action because you used force against me, the act of the heir correctly remains within the stipulation.
nam et ex ipsius posteriore ui potest committi stipulatio: non enim ad unam uim pertinet.
For the stipulation can also be forfeited by a subsequent force used by the promisor himself; indeed, it does not relate to a single instance of force.
nam sicut et ipsius et heredis caput, ita ipsius uis uel saepius facta complectitur, ut condemnetur quanti interest.
For just as it embraces the person of both the promisor himself and the heir, so it also embraces the force used by the promisor himself, even if committed more often, so that he may be condemned for the amount of the interest.
aut si sic uolumus factam esse stipulationem: 'neque per te neque per heredem tuum fieri?', ut ad unam uim primam teneat: si uim fecerit, amplius ex heredis committi non poterit: ergo si actum sit quasi ex ipsius ui, tota consumpta sit: quod non est uerum.
Or, if we wish the stipulation to have been made thus: "that no force be used either by you or by your heir," so that it holds only for the first single instance of force: if he has used force, it can no longer be forfeited by the act of the heir; therefore, if an action is brought as if on the force used by the promisor himself, the entire stipulation would be consumed; which is not true.

Notes

  1. §45.1.133.prrecte remanere factum heredis in stipulatione — remanere is an infinitive in the accusative-and-infinitive construction (indirect speech) expressing the jurist's conclusion following the conditional clauses 'si stipulatus sim... et egi...'. A governing verb of opinion is implied. The accusative subject is 'factum heredis' (the act of the heir).
  2. §45.1.133.pret ipsius et heredis caput — The word 'caput' here signifies the legal 'subject' or 'person/category' of the obligor covered by the stipulation. 'et ipsius et heredis' are genitives modifying 'caput', meaning 'the person of both the promisor himself and his heir'.
  3. §45.1.133.prtota consumpta sit — This forms the hypothetical apodosis (perfect subjunctive) to the conditional clause 'si actum sit...'. It points to the disadvantage that the entire action under the stipulation would be 'consumed' (the consumptive effect of litis contestatio) if the contract were interpreted as holding only for a single instance of force.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §45.1.133.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:45.1.133.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.