Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §46.1.19.pr

Master's Recovery of Money Paid by an Unauthorized Slave Surety

Passage 7567 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This section discusses whether a master can recover money paid by a slave who became a surety without the master's knowledge, distinguishing between recovery by vindication (vindicatio) and by condictio depending on whether the surety was based on the peculium and which fund was used for payment.

[IDEM libro quarto ex Minicio. ]
[THE SAME in the fourth book on Minicius.] A slave, without the knowledge of his master, had become surety for someone and had paid money on that account.
§46.1.19.prSeruus inscio domino pro quodam fideiusserat et eo nomine pecuniam soluerat: quaerebatur, dominus possetne ab eo, cui soluta esset, repetere.
The question arose whether the master could recover it from the person to whom it had been paid.
respondit: interest, quo nomine fideiusserit: nam si ex causa peculiari fideiussit, tunc id, quod ex peculio soluerit, repetere dominus non poterit, quod ex dominica causa soluerit, uindicabitur: si uero extra causam peculii fideiusserit, quod ex pecunia dominica soluerit, aeque uindicabitur, quod ex peculio, condici poterit.
He answered: it depends on what account he became surety; for if he became surety on the basis of his peculium, then the master cannot recover what the slave paid from the peculium, but what he paid from the master’s property will be recovered by vindication. If, however, he became surety outside the scope of his peculium, what he paid from the master’s money will likewise be recovered by vindication, and what he paid from the peculium can be recovered by condictio.

Notes

  1. §46.1.19.prinscio domino — An ablative absolute construction formed by the noun dominus and the ablative of the negative adjective inscius, meaning "without the knowledge of the master."
  2. §46.1.19.pruindicabitur — The future passive third-person singular of vindicare. Since the money was paid from the master's property without his consent, ownership is deemed not to have transferred, making it subject to a proprietary claim (rei vindicatio).
  3. §46.1.19.prcondici poterit — Indicates that when the slave paid from the peculium, the ownership of the money transferred to the recipient, meaning vindicatio is unavailable, but a personal action for unjust enrichment (condictio) can be brought instead.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §46.1.19.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:46.1.19.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.