Corpus iurisprudentiae Romanae

Repertorium zu den Quellen des römischen Rechts

Digesta Iustiniani Augusti

Recognovit Mommsen (1870) et retractavit Krüger (1928)
Convertit in Anglica lingua Scott (1932)
Dig. XXVI9,
Quando ex facto tutoris vel curatoris minores agere vel conveniri possunt
Liber vicesimus sextus
IX.

Quando ex facto tutoris vel curatoris minores agere vel conveniri possunt

(When Minors Can Sue or Be Sued on Account of the Acts of Their Guardians or Curators.)

1Pom­po­nius li­bro vi­ce­si­mo no­no ad Sa­binum. Ob do­lum ma­lum vel cul­pam tu­to­ris Aris­to ait pu­pil­lum pos­ses­so­rem con­dem­nan­dum, sed non pu­to, quan­ti ac­tor in li­tem iu­ra­ret: et ta­men il­lud ita est, si rem a tu­to­re pu­pil­lus ser­va­re pos­sit.

1Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book XXIX. Aristo says that a ward who is in possession can have judgment rendered against him on account of the fraud or negligence of his guardian; but I do not think that the damages should be fixed at the amount to which the plaintiff will make oath in court. Nevertheless, this would be the case if the ward can recover the value of the property from his guardian.

2Ul­pia­nus li­bro pri­mo opi­nio­num. Si tu­tor vel cu­ra­tor pe­cu­nia eius, cu­ius neg­otia ad­mi­nis­trat, mu­tua da­ta ip­se sti­pu­la­tus fue­rit vel prae­dia in no­men suum eme­rit, uti­lis ac­tio ei, cu­ius pe­cu­nia fuit, da­tur ad rem vin­di­can­dam vel mu­tuam pe­cu­niam ex­igen­dam.

2Ad Dig. 26,9,2Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 174, Note 9.Ulpianus, Opinions, Book I. Where a guardian or a curator lends the money of the minor whose affairs he is administering, and he himself makes the stipulation, or purchases land in his own name, an equitable action will be granted to the party to whom the money belongs, for its recovery, or for the collection of the loan.

3Pa­pi­nia­nus li­bro vi­ce­si­mo quaes­tio­num. Do­lus tu­to­rum pue­ro ne­que no­ce­re ne­que prod­es­se de­bet: quod au­tem vul­go di­ci­tur tu­to­ris do­lum pu­pil­lo non no­ce­re, tunc ve­rum est, cum ex il­lius frau­de lo­cu­ple­tior pu­pil­lus fac­tus non est. qua­re me­ri­to Sa­b­inus tri­bu­to­ria ac­tio­ne pu­pil­lum con­ve­nien­dum ex do­lo tu­to­ris ex­is­ti­ma­vit, sci­li­cet si per in­iquam dis­tri­bu­tio­nem pu­pil­li ra­tio­ni­bus fa­vit. quod in de­po­si­ti quo­que ac­tio­ne di­cen­dum est, item he­redi­ta­tis pe­ti­tio­ne, si mo­do, quod tu­to­ris do­lo de­siit, pu­pil­li ra­tio­ni­bus il­la­tum pro­be­tur.

3Papinianus, Questions, Book XX. The fraudulent acts of guardians can neither injure nor profit their wards. When it is commonly said that the fraud of a guardian cannot injure a ward, this means in case the latter is not pecuniarily benefited by the deceitful conduct of the guardian. Wherefore, Sabinus very reasonably holds that the ward can be sued in a tributorian action on account of fraud committed by his guardian; for instance, if he should favor the interest of his ward by means of an unjust distribution of property. The same rule applies in an action on deposit, and also in one claiming an estate, provided that it is proved that what the plaintiff lost through the fraud of the guardian was credited to the account of the ward.

4Ul­pia­nus li­bro se­xa­ge­si­mo quar­to ad edic­tum. At si ex­trin­se­cus ali­quid tu­tor do­lo ad­mi­se­rit, pu­pil­lo ni­hil no­ce­re opor­tet.

4Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book LXIV. If, however, the guardian should commit any fraudulent act with reference to outside matters, the ward would sustain no injury.

5Pa­pi­nia­nus li­bro quin­to re­spon­so­rum. Post mor­tem fu­rio­si non da­bi­tur in cu­ra­to­rem qui neg­otia ges­sit iu­di­ca­ti ac­tio, non ma­gis quam in tu­to­res, si mo­do nul­lam ex con­sen­su post de­po­si­tum of­fi­cium no­va­tio­nem fac­tam et in cu­ra­to­rem vel tu­to­rem ob­li­ga­tio­nem es­se trans­la­tam con­sta­bit. 1Tu­tor, qui pe­cu­niam se so­lu­tu­rum ca­vit, quam pa­ter pu­pil­li con­dem­na­tus fue­rat, ac­tio­nem post tu­te­lam fi­ni­tam rec­te re­cu­sat. non idem in eo pla­cuit, qui suo no­mi­ne mu­tuam pe­cu­niam ac­ce­pit et iu­di­ca­tum pro pu­pil­lo fe­cit, ni­si for­te cre­di­tor id­eo con­tra­xit, ut in cau­sam iu­di­ca­ti pe­cu­nia trans­iret.

5Papinianus, Opinions, Book V. After the death of an insane person an action to enforce a judgment will not be granted against a curator who administered his affairs, any more than against a guardian; provided that, after his office has been relinquished it is established that no renewal was made by his consent and the obligation transferred to either the curator or the guardian. 1Ad Dig. 26,9,5,1Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. II, § 482, Note 8.A guardian who binds himself to pay a sum of money for which judgment was rendered against the father of his ward, can legally refuse to do so, if an action is brought against him after the termination of his guardianship. It was decided that the same rule will not apply to the case where a guardian borrowed money in his own name, and with it paid a judgment for his ward, unless the creditor made the contract in order that the money might be used for the satisfaction of the judgment.

6Idem li­bro se­cun­do de­fi­ni­tio­num. Tu­tor in­ter­po­si­to de­cre­to prae­to­ris ac­to­rem re­li­quit. se­cun­dum eum sen­ten­tia dic­ta iu­di­ca­ti trans­fer­tur ad pu­pil­lum ac­tio non mi­nus, quam si tu­tor op­ti­nuis­set.

6The Same, Definitions, Book II. A guardian, in compliance with a decree of the Prætor, left an agent for the administration of the affairs of his ward. If judgment is rendered in favor of said agent, an action for its enforcement will be transferred to the ward, just as if the guardian himself had obtained it.

7Scae­vo­la li­bro ter­tio de­ci­mo quaes­tio­num. Tu­to­ri, qui in­fan­tem de­fen­dit, suc­cur­ri­tur, ut in pu­pil­lum iu­di­ca­ti ac­tio de­tur.

7Scævola, Questions, Book XIII. Relief is granted to a guardian who defends a young child, in order that an action for the enforcement of the judgment may be granted against the ward.

8Idem li­bro quin­to re­spon­so­rum. Tu­tor, qui et co­he­res pu­pil­lo erat, cum con­ve­ni­re­tur fi­dei­com­mis­si no­mi­ne, in so­li­dum ip­se ca­vit: quae­si­tum est, an in ad­ul­tum pu­pil­lum pro par­te dan­da sit uti­lis ac­tio. re­spon­dit dan­dam11Die Großausgabe liest dan­da statt dan­dam..

8The Same, Opinions, Book V. A guardian, who was at the same time the co-heir of his ward, had an action brought against him for the execution of a trust, and bound himself for payment in full. The question arose whether an equitable action should be granted against the ward, after he had reached the age of puberty, for the recovery of his share of the amount. The answer was that it should be granted.