1Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book III. The Edict is characterized by the greatest equity and is without just cause of complaint by anyone, for who will refuse to be judged by the same law which he himself applied, or caused to be applied to others? 1“If anyone invested with magistracy, or other authority has established a new rule against any party, he must himself be judged by the same, when his adversary demands it. Where anyone has obtained the application of a new law before an official invested with magistracy, or other authority, and subsequently some adversary of his demands it, he shall have his case decided against him by the same law; that is to say, that whatever anyone thinks to be just with reference to another party he must suffer to prevail against himself as well.” 2Moreover, these words, “What he who administers justice has established”, we must accept according to the effect, and not according to the words; and therefore if anyone wishes to render a decision and is prevented from doing so, and his decision should not have any effect, the Edict does not apply, for the word “established” denotes something which has been perfected, a wrong which has been consummated and not merely begun; and therefore if anyone administers justice between parties over whom he has no jurisdiction, since the proceedings are void and his judgment has no force, We think that the Edict does not apply; for what does an attempt amount to when no injury resulted?

2Paulus, On the Edict, Book III. The malice of the presiding judge is punished by this Edict; for, if through the ignorance of an assessor the law was interpreted in a different manner than it should have been, this should not affect the magistrate, but the assessor himself.

3Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book III. When anyone has obtained an unjust decision against another, the same rule shall be applied to the party alone, where this took place on his own motion; but if he did not ask for it, it cannot be enforced against him. But where he obtained it, whether he made use of any rule or merely had permission to avail himself of it, but did not do so, he will be punished under this Edict. 1If my procurator made this unjust demand, the question arises to whom this same rule should be applied. Pomponius thinks to me alone, that is if I delegated my authority to him for an especial purpose, or ratified it. Where, however, the guardian or curator of an insane person or of a minor makes such a demand, he himself shall be punished by this Edict. The same rule shall be observed against the procurator if he was appointed in a matter in which he was interested. 2This penalty is incurred by all who are included in the provisions of the Edict, not only by the petitioner who was injured by him, but by every one whomsoever who institutes proceedings at any time. 3If anyone for whom you are surety has obtained an order of court prohibiting any debtor from filing an exception against him, and you wish to file one in the matter in which you become surety; neither he nor you should obtain the same; although in the meantime you may suffer injury if your debtor is not solvent. But if you yourself come under the terms of the Edict, the principal debtor may plead the exception, but you cannot do so; and the penalty to which you are liable will not affect him, and hence you will have no right of action on mandate against him. 4If my son, while a magistrate, should come within the terms of this Edict, will the Edict be applicable in any actions which I may bring in his behalf? I do not think so, as otherwise my condition will become worse on his account. 5When the Prætor says: “He must be judged by the same rule”, is this penalty transmitted to the heir? Julianus stated that the action should not only be refused to him, but also to his heir. 6He also stated, and not without reason, that he was liable to the penalty of the Edict, not only with reference to rights of action in which he was involved when he came within the terms of the Edict, but also with reference to all those which were acquired for him subsequently. 7Julianus thinks that money already paid under such circumstances cannot be recovered, as there was still ground for payment under natural law, which prohibits recovery.

4Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book I. The Prætor very properly and justly inserted this exception: “Unless one of the parties has acted unjustly against some one who himself had acted in the same way against another.” And, indeed, where a magistrate desires to sustain the Edict, or a litigant wishes to obtain the benefit of it, he might render himself liable and incur the penalty prescribed by the Edict.