[IDEM libro nono ad Plautium. ] §45.3.32.prSi, cum duorum usus fructus esset in seruo, et is seruus uni nominatim stipulatus sit ex ea re, quae ad utrosque pertinet, Sabinus ait, quoniam soli obligatus esset, uidendum esse, quemadmodum alter usuarius partem suam recipere possit, quoniam inter eos nulla communio iuris esset.
[THE SAME, from the ninth book on Plautius.] If, when two persons have the usufruct in a slave, and this slave has stipulated specifically in the name of one of them concerning a matter which relates to both, Sabinus says that, since the promisor is bound to that one alone, it must be considered how the other usufructuary can recover his share, since there is no legal community of right between them.
sed uerius est utili communi diuidundo iudicio inter eos agi posse.
But the more correct view is that an action can be brought between them by an equitable action for the division of common property.