Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §45.1.34.pr

Parties' Liability in Stipulating Things Outside of Trade

Passage 7380 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This section explains the difference in the validity of a stipulation regarding a thing outside of trade, depending on whether the creditor (stipulator) or the debtor (promisor) lacks the right of trade.

[ULPIANUS libro quadragensimo octauo ad Sabinum. ] §45.1.34.prMultum interest, utrum ego stipuler rem, cuius commercium habere non possum, an quis promittat: si stipuler rem, cuius commercium non habeo, inutilem esse stipulationem placet: si quis promittat, cuius non commercium habet, ipsi nocere, non mihi.
[ULPIAN, in the forty-eighth book on Sabinus.] It makes a great difference whether I stipulate for a thing of which I cannot have the right of trade, or whether someone promises it: if I stipulate for a thing of which I do not have the right of trade, it is agreed that the stipulation is void; if someone promises a thing of which he does not have the right of trade, it is agreed that this is detrimental to himself, not to me.

Notes

  1. §45.1.34.prMultum interest, utrum... an... — The impersonal verb "interest" (it makes a difference) takes the indirect question clauses introduced by "utrum... an..." (whether... or...) as its subject.
  2. §45.1.34.pripsi nocere, non mihi — The intransitive verb "nocere" (to harm, to be detrimental) governs the dative case (ipsi, mihi). This infinitive clause functions as a continuation of the accusative with infinitive construction dependent on "placet" (it is agreed/held) from the preceding clause.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §45.1.34.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:45.1.34.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.