[IDEM libro sexagensimo nono ad edictum. ] §46.2.19.prDoli exceptio, quae poterat deleganti opponi, cessat in persona creditoris, cui quis delegatus est.
[THE SAME, On the Edict, Book 69.] The defense of fraud, which could be opposed to the delegating party, ceases in the person of the creditor to whom someone has been delegated.
idemque est et in ceteris similibus exceptionibus, immo et in ea, quae ex senatus consulto filio familias datur: nam aduersus creditorem, cui delegatus est ab eo, qui mutuam pecuniam contra senatus consultum dederat, non utetur exceptione, quia nihil in ea promissione contra senatus consultum fit: tanto magis, quod hic nec solutum repetere potest.
And the same is true in other similar defenses, and indeed even in that which is given to a son-in-power under the senate decree: for against a creditor to whom he has been delegated by one who had lent money contrary to the senate decree, he shall not use the defense, because in that promise nothing is done contrary to the senate decree; all the more so, since he cannot even recover what has been paid.
diuersum est in muliere, quae contra senatus consultum promisit: nam et in secunda promissione intercessio est.
It is different in the case of a woman who has promised contrary to the senate decree: for in the second promise also there is an intercession.
idemque est in minore, qui circumscriptus delegatur, quia, si etiamnunc minor est, rursum circumuenitur: diuersum, si iam excessit aetatem uiginti quinque annorum, quamuis adhuc possit restitui aduersus priorem creditorem.
And the same is true in the case of a minor who is delegated after being defrauded, because, if he is still a minor, he is circumvented again; it is different if he has already exceeded the age of twenty-five years, although he may still be restored against the prior creditor.
ideo autem denegantur exceptiones aduersus secundum creditorem, quia in priuatis contractibus et pactionibus non facile scire petitor potest, quid inter eum qui delegatus est et debitorem actum est aut, etiamsi sciat, dissimulare debet, ne curiosus uideatur: et ideo merito denegandum est aduersus eum exceptionem ex persona debitoris.
Moreover, defenses against the second creditor are denied because in private contracts and agreements, the claimant cannot easily know what has been transacted between the person delegated and the debtor, or, even if he knows, he ought to dissemble lest he seem inquisitive; and therefore, it is rightly denied to bring a defense against him arising from the person of the debtor.