[ULPIANUS libro octauo decimo ad edictum. ] §9.2.29.prQuemadmodum si laqueos eo loci posuisses, quo ius ponendi non haberes, et pecus uicini in eos laqueos incidisset.
Just as if you had placed traps in a place where you had no right to place them, and a neighbor's beast fell into those traps.
§9.2.29.1Si protectum meum, quod supra domum tuam nullo iure habebam, reccidisses, posse me tecum damni iniuria agere Proculus scribit: debuisti enim mecum ius mihi non esse protectum habere agere: nec esse aequum damnum me pati recisis a te meis tignis.
Proculus writes that if you cut down my projection, which I had over your house without any right, I can bring an action against you for damage unlawfully caused; for you ought to have brought an action against me to establish that I had no right to have the projection, and it is not fair that I should suffer damage by your cutting down my beams.
aliud est dicendum ex rescripto imperatoris Seueri, qui ei, per cuius domum traiectus erat aquae ductus citra seruitutem, rescripsit iure suo posse eum intercidere, et merito: interest enim, quod hic in suo protexit, ille in alieno fecit.
A different view must be taken under the rescript of the Emperor Severus, who wrote back to a person through whose house a water duct had been laid without an easement, that he could cut it by his own right, and rightly so; for there is a difference, in that here the owner built a projection on his own land, whereas there the other person built on someone else's.
§9.2.29.2Si nauis tua inpacta in meam scapham damnum mihi dedit, quaesitum est, quae actio mihi competeret.
If your ship collided with my boat and caused me damage, the question was raised as to which action would be available to me.
et ait Proculus, si in potestate nautarum fuit, ne id accideret, et culpa eorum factum sit, lege Aquilia cum nautis agendum, quia parui refert nauem immittendo aut serraculum ad nauem ducendo an tua manu damnum dederis, quia omnibus his modis per te damno adficior: sed si fune rupto aut cum a nullo regeretur nauis incurrisset, cum domino agendum non esse.
Proculus says that if it was in the power of the sailors to prevent it from happening, and it occurred through their fault, an action under the Lex Aquilia should be brought against the sailors, because it matters little whether you caused the damage by driving your ship or steering the towline towards the boat, or by your own hand, since in all these ways I am affected by damage through you; but if the ship collided because a rope broke or when it was controlled by no one, an action should not be brought against the owner.
§9.2.29.3Item Labeo scribit, si, cum ui uentorum nauis impulsa esset in funes anchorarum alterius et nautae funes praecidissent, si nullo alio modo nisi praecisis funibus explicare se potuit, nullam actionem dandam.
Likewise Labeo writes that if, when a ship was driven by the force of the winds against the anchor cables of another and the sailors cut the cables, and she could not extricate herself in any other way except by cutting the cables, no action should be granted.
idemque Labeo et Proculus et circa retia piscatorum, in quae nauis piscatorum inciderat, aestimarunt.
Labeo and Proculus held the same view regarding the nets of fishermen in which a ship had got caught.
plane si culpa nautarum id factum esset, lege Aquilia agendum.
Clearly, if this happened through the fault of the sailors, an action under the Lex Aquilia should be brought.
sed ubi damni iniuria agitur ob retia, non piscium, qui ideo capti non sunt, fieri aestimationem, cum incertum fuerit, an caperentur.
But when an action for damage unlawfully caused is brought concerning the nets, the valuation is not made for the fish that were consequently not caught, since it was uncertain whether they would be caught.
idemque et in uenatoribus et in aucupibus probandum.
And the same is to be approved in the case of hunters and fowlers.
§9.2.29.4Si nauis alteram contra se uenientem obruisset, aut in gubernatorem aut in ducatorem actionem competere damni iniuriae Alfenus ait: sed si tanta uis naui facta sit, quae temperari non potuit, nullam in dominum dandam actionem: sin autem culpa nautarum id factum sit, puto aquiliae sufficere.
If a ship collided with and sank another coming towards her, Alfenus says that an action for damage unlawfully caused is available either against the helmsman or against the pilot; but if such great force was applied to the ship that it could not be controlled, no action should be granted against the owner; but if it happened through the fault of the sailors, I think an action under the Lex Aquilia is sufficient.
§9.2.29.5Si funem quis, quo religata navis erat, praeciderit, de naue quae periit in factum agendum.
If someone cuts the rope by which a ship was tied up, an action on the case must be brought concerning the ship that was lost.
§9.2.29.6Hac actione ex hoc legis capite de omnibus animalibus laesis, quae pecudes non sunt, agendum est, ut puta de cane: sed et de apro et leone ceterisque feris et auibus idem erit dicendum.
By this action, under this chapter of the law, proceedings must be brought concerning all injured animals that are not classed as cattle, as for instance a dog; and the same must be said of a wild boar, a lion, and other wild beasts and birds.
§9.2.29.7Magistratus municipales, si damnum iniuria dederint, posse Aquilia teneri.
Municipal magistrates can be held liable under the Lex Aquilia if they cause damage unlawfully.
nam et cum pecudes aliquis pignori cepisset et fame eas necauisset, dum non patitur te eis cibaria adferre, in factum actio danda est.
For also when someone has taken cattle as a pledge and starved them to death by not allowing you to bring food to them, an action on the case must be granted.
item si dum putat se ex lege capere pignus, non ex lege ceperit et res tritas corruptasque reddat, dicitur legem Aquiliam locum habere: quod dicendum est et si ex lege pignus cepit.
Likewise, if while thinking he is taking a pledge according to the law, he takes it not according to the law and returns the items worn out and damaged, it is said that the Lex Aquilia has application; which must also be said if he took the pledge according to the law.
si quid tamen magistratus aduersus resistentem uiolentius fecerit, non tenebitur aquilia: nam et cum pignori seruum cepisset et ille se suspenderit, nulla datur actio.
However, if the magistrate does something rather violently against someone resisting him, he will not be held liable under the Lex Aquilia; for also when he took a slave as a pledge and the slave hanged himself, no action is granted.
§9.2.29.8Haec urba: 'quanti in triginta diebus proximis fuit', etsi non habent ' plurimi', sic tamen esse accipienda constat.
These words: 'whatever it was worth in the nearest thirty days', even if they do not contain 'the highest', it is nevertheless established that they must be understood in this sense.