Capacity of an Interdict to Enter Stipulations

Notes

1. §45.1.6.prcui bonis interdictum est — The verb `interdicere` (to forbid/interdict) is used impersonally in the passive perfect (`interdictum est`). The person to whom something is forbidden is in the dative case (`cui`), and the forbidden object is in the ablative of separation (`bonis`). It literally means "to whom it has been interdicted from his property," referring to the interdiction of a prodigal (prodigus) from managing his estate.
2. §45.1.6.prstipulando — This is the ablative gerund of the deponent verb `stipulari` (to obtain a promise/stipulate as a creditor). In contrast, `promittendo` in the next clause is the gerund of `promittere` (to promise/bind oneself as a debtor). Under Roman law, an interdicted person can unilaterally acquire rights, but cannot dispose of property (`tradere`) or bind himself to obligations (`obligari`); thus, the functional difference between these two verbs determines the presence or absence of legal effect.
3. §45.1.6.prtradere uero non potest uel promittendo obligari — The auxiliary phrase `non potest` (cannot) governs both the active infinitive `tradere` (to deliver) and the passive infinitive `obligari` (to be bound). The semantic subject of `obligari` is the main clause's subject, `Is` (the interdicted person).
4. §45.1.6.prsicut nec pro furioso — The phrase `sicut nec...` elliptically carries over the verb from the preceding clause: `sicut nec pro furioso [fideiussor interuenire poterit]` (just as a surety cannot intervene on behalf of a madman). It demonstrates the principle that a surety's obligation (fideiussor) cannot stand if the principal obligation is void, and highlights the similarity in legal incapacity between the interdicted prodigal (prodigus) and the madman (furiosus).