[PAULUS libro uicensimo primo ad edictum. ] §6.1.33.prFructus non modo percepti, sed et qui percipi honeste potuerunt aestimandi sunt: et ideo si dolo aut culpa possessoris res petita perierit, ueriorem putat Pomponius Trebatii opinionem putantis eo usque fructuum rationem habendam, quo usque haberetur, si non perisset, id est ad rei iudicandae tempus: quod et Iuliano placet.
[PAULUS, in the twenty-first book on the Edict.] Not only the fruits that have been gathered, but also those which could honorably have been gathered must be estimated: and therefore, if the thing claimed should perish through the dolus or negligence of the possessor, Pomponius thinks that the opinion of Trebatius is more correct, who holds that the account of the fruits must be maintained up to the point at which it would have been maintained if the thing had not perished, that is, up to the time of the judgment: which is also approved by Julian.
hac ratione si nudae proprietatis dominus petierit et inter moras usus fructus amissus sit, ex eo tempore, quo ad proprietatem usus fructus reuersus est, ratio fructuum habetur.
By this reasoning, if the owner of the bare property has brought an action, and during the delays the usufruct is lost, the account of the fruits is held from that time at which the usufruct returned to the property.