Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §45.1.29.pr-45.1.29.1

Singularity and Plurality of Stipulations and Stolen Property

Passage 7375 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

The text discusses the criteria for whether stipulations are single or multiple based on sums and specific items, and explains the validity of stipulating for one's own property from a thief and its effect on the action for recovery.

[ULPIANUS libro quadragensimo sexto ad Sabinum. ] §45.1.29.prScire debemus in stipulationibus tot esse stipulationes, quot summae sunt, totque esse stipulationes, quot species sunt.
[ULPIANUS, in the forty-sixth book on Sabinus.] We ought to know that in stipulations there are as many stipulations as there are sums, and as many stipulations as there are specific things.
secundum quod euenit, ut mixta una summa uel specie, quae non fuit in praecedenti stipulatione, non fiat nouatio, sed efficit duas esse stipulationes.
According to this, it happens that when a sum or a specific thing which was not in the preceding stipulation is mixed in, a novation does not take place, but it results in there being two stipulations.
quamuis autem placuerit tot esse stipulationes, quot summae, totque esse stipulationes quot res: tamen si pecuniam quis, quae in conspectu est, stipulatus sit, uel aceruum pecuniae, non tot sunt stipulationes, quot nummorum corpora, sed una stipulatio: nam per singulos denarios singulas esse stipulationes absurdum est.
Although, moreover, it has been accepted that there are as many stipulations as there are sums, and as many stipulations as there are things, nevertheless, if anyone has stipulated for money which is in sight, or for a heap of money, there are not as many stipulations as there are individual coins, but only one stipulation; for it is absurd that there should be individual stipulations for individual denarii.
stipulationem quoque legatorum constat unam esse, quamuis plura corpora sint uel plura legata.
It is also established that a stipulation for legacies is single, although there may be several items or several legacies.
sed et familiae uel omnium seruorum stipulatio una est.
But also a stipulation for a household or for all of one's slaves is single.
itemque quadrigae aut lecticariorum stipulatio una est.
And likewise, a stipulation for a four-horse chariot or for litter-bearers is single.
at si quis illud et illud stipulatus sit, tot stipulationes sunt, quot corpora.
But if anyone has stipulated for "this and that," there are as many stipulations as there are individual items.
§45.1.29.1Si a fure hominem sim stipulatus, quaesitum est, an stipulatio ualeat.
If I have stipulated with a thief for a slave, the question has been raised whether the stipulation is valid.
mouet quaestionem, quod stipulatus hominem plerumque meum uideor: non ualet autem huiusmodi stipulatio, ubi quis rem suam stipulatus est.
What raises the question is that in stipulating for the slave I usually seem to be stipulating for my own property; and a stipulation of this kind is not valid, where one has stipulated for one's own property.
et constat, si quidem ita stipulatus sim: 'quod ex causa condictionis dare facere oportet?', stipulationem ualere: si uero hominem dari stipulatus fuero, nullius momenti esse stipulationem.
And it is established that if indeed I have stipulated thus: "Whatever you ought to give or do by reason of a condictio?", the stipulation is valid; but if I have stipulated for the slave to be given, the stipulation is of no moment.
quod si postea sine mora decessisse proponatur seruus, non teneri furem condictione Marcellus ait: quamdiu enim uiuit, condici poterit, at si decessisse proponatur, in ea condicione est, ut euanescat condictio propter stipulationem.
But if it is proposed that the slave subsequently died without delay, Marcellus says that the thief is not bound by the condictio; for as long as he lives, he can be sued by condictio, but if it is proposed that he has died, it is in such a condition that the condictio vanishes on account of the stipulation.

Notes

  1. §45.1.29.prmixta una summa uel specie — mixta is a perfect passive participle in the nominative feminine singular, agreeing with summa, describing the situation where a new sum or specific thing has been introduced within the clause introduced by euenit, ut...
  2. §45.1.29.1'quod ex causa condictionis dare facere oportet?' — quod is a relative pronoun with an implied antecedent. In a verbal stipulation, this formula targets the abstract obligation 'to give or do by reason of the condictio (action for recovery)' rather than the stolen object itself. This avoids the invalidity of directly stipulating for one's own property.
  3. §45.1.29.1ut euanescat condictio propter stipulationem — A consecutive ut-clause depending on in ea condicione est, ut... ('is in such a condition that...'). propter stipulationem indicates that even if the stipulation itself might be invalid, the attempt to stipulate (or the transformation of the obligation) causes the original action for recovery (condictio) to become legally extinguished.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §45.1.29.pr-45.1.29.1. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:45.1.29.pr-45.1.29.1

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.