Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §47.2.34.pr

Liability of an Aider versus a Manifest Thief

Passage 7895 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This text explains that a person who aids a thief is never a manifest thief and is only liable for non-manifest theft, whereas the thief caught in the act is liable for manifest theft for the same offense.

[PAULUS libro nono ad Sabinum. ] §47.2.34.prIs, qui opem furtum facienti fert, numquam manifestus est: itaque accidit, ut is quidem, qui opem tulit, furti nec manifesti, is autem, qui deprehensus est, ob eandem rem manifesti teneatur.
[PAULUS in the ninth book on Sabinus.] He who brings aid to one committing a theft is never a manifest thief; and so it happens that while he who brought aid is held liable for non-manifest theft, he, on the other hand, who was caught is held liable for manifest theft in respect of the same matter.

Notes

  1. §47.2.34.prfurtum facienti — The present participle facienti is in the dative singular, serving as the indirect object of the verbal phrase opem ferre (to bring aid).
  2. §47.2.34.prfurti nec manifesti — This is a genitive of charge or liability, depending on the verb teneatur (is held liable/prosecuted). In the clause starting with is quidem, the corresponding verb teneatur is omitted by ellipsis.
  3. §47.2.34.prut is quidem ... teneatur — This is a substantive clause of result (ut-clause) functioning as the subject of the impersonal verb accidit (it happens that...). The contrast between quidem and autem highlights the difference in liability between the helper (non-manifest) and the actual thief caught in the act (manifest).

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §47.2.34.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:47.2.34.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.