Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §47.2.9.pr-47.2.9.1

Continuous Handling and the Concurrence of Actions

Passage 7869 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

The text explains that continuous handling by a thief does not generate new actions for theft even if the stolen property increases, and outlines the judge's duties when a vindicatio and a condictio overlap, especially after the valuation has been paid.

[POMPONIUS libro sexto ad Sabinum. ] §47.2.9.prEi, qui furti actionem habet, adsidua contrectatione furis non magis furti actio nasci potest, ne in id quidem, in quod creuisset postea res subrepta.
[POMPONIUS, on Sabinus, Book VI.] For one who has an action for theft, no further action for theft can arise from the thief's continuous handling of the property, not even in respect of that by which the stolen property afterwards increased.
§47.2.9.1Sed si eam a fure uindicassem, condictio mihi manebit.
But if I have claimed it from the thief by a vindicatio, the condictio will still remain to me.
sed potest dici officio iudicis, qui de proprietate cognoscit, contineri, ut non aliter iubeat restitui, quam si condictionem petitor remitteret: quod si ex condictione ante damnatus reus litis aestimationem sustulerit, ut aut omnimodo absoluat reum aut (quod magis placet), si paratus esset petitor aestimationem restituere nec restituetur ei homo, quanti in litem iurasset, damnaretur ei possessor.
However, it can be said to be within the office of the judge who takes cognizance of the ownership to order restoration only if the plaintiff waives the condictio. But if the defendant, having previously been condemned under the condictio, has paid the valuation of the suit, the judge should either acquit the defendant in any event, or (which is more approved), if the plaintiff were ready to return the valuation and the slave is not restored to him, the possessor should be condemned to him for the amount the plaintiff had sworn to in the suit.

Notes

  1. 47.2.9.pradsidua contrectatione — Aptitude of the ablative expressing cause or means. It indicates that even if the 'handling' (contrectatio), which is a constituent element of theft (furtum), is performed continuously, no separate new action can arise as long as the owner already has an action for theft for the same item.
  2. 47.2.9.1condictio — Here, it refers to the personal action for the recovery of stolen property (condictio ex causa furtiva). Unlike the vindicatio, which is a proprietary action based on ownership, this is a personal action claiming restoration.
  3. 47.2.9.1quod si ex condictione ante damnatus reus litis aestimationem sustulerit, ut aut omnimodo absoluat reum aut... — A highly complex syntax. The noun clause (or consecutive clause) `ut... absoluat... aut damnaretur`, which follows the conditional clause `quod si... sustulerit`, logically connects back to `potest dici officio iudicis... contineri` in the preceding sentence. That is, 'if the defendant has already paid the valuation, it can be said to be within the office of the judge to either acquit the defendant... or condemn him (under certain conditions).' Note also the tense shift between the perfect subjunctive (or future perfect indicative) `sustulerit` in the protasis and the imperfect subjunctive `damnaretur` in the apodosis.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §47.2.9.pr-47.2.9.1. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:47.2.9.pr-47.2.9.1

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.