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. IV1,
De in integrum restitutionibus
Liber quartus
I.

De in integrum restitutionibus

(Concerning Complete Restitution.)

1Ul­pia­nus li­bro un­de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. Uti­li­tas hu­ius ti­tu­li non eget com­men­da­tio­ne, ip­se enim se os­ten­dit. nam sub hoc ti­tu­lo plu­ri­fa­riam prae­tor ho­mi­ni­bus vel lap­sis vel cir­cum­scrip­tis sub­ve­nit, si­ve me­tu si­ve cal­li­di­ta­te si­ve ae­ta­te si­ve ab­sen­tia in­ci­de­runt in cap­tio­nem

1Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XI. The usefulness of this Title needs no commendation, for it speaks for itself. Under it the Prætor in many ways comes to the relief of parties who have made mistakes, or have been cheated, and who, through intimidation, cunning, youth, or absence, have been overreached.

2Pau­lus li­bro pri­mo sen­ten­tia­rum. si­ve per sta­tus mu­ta­tio­nem aut ius­tum er­ro­rem.

2Paulus, Sentences, Book I. Or through a change of condition, or excusable error.

3Mo­des­ti­nus li­bro oc­ta­vo pan­dec­ta­rum. Om­nes in in­te­grum re­sti­tu­tio­nes cau­sa co­gni­ta a prae­to­re pro­mit­tun­tur, sci­li­cet ut ius­ti­tiam ea­rum cau­sa­rum exa­mi­net, an ve­rae sint, qua­rum no­mi­ne sin­gu­lis sub­ve­nit.

3Modestinus, Pandects, Book VIII. All persons are promised complete restitution by the Prætor when proper cause is shown; so that he may examine the justice of the case, and ascertain whether it belongs to that class to which he can afford relief.

4Cal­lis­tra­tus li­bro pri­mo edic­ti mo­ni­to­rii. Scio il­lud a qui­bus­dam ob­ser­va­tum, ne prop­ter sa­tis mi­ni­mam rem vel sum­mam, si ma­io­ri rei vel sum­mae prae­iu­di­ce­tur, au­dia­tur is qui in in­te­grum re­sti­tui pos­tu­lat.

4Callistratus, Monitory Edict, Book I. I know that it has been held by some authorities that a party who applies for complete restitution shall not be heard where some very insignificant affair or sum is involved, if this would prejudice the hearing of some more important matter, or the collection of a larger sum.

5Pau­lus li­bro sep­ti­mo ad edic­tum. Ne­mo vi­de­tur re ex­clu­sus, quem prae­tor in in­te­grum se re­sti­tu­tu­rum pol­li­cea­tur.

5Paulus, On the Edict, Book VII. Ad Dig. 4,1,5 pr.ROHGE, Bd. 14 (1875), Nr. 40, S. 110: Vermengung verschiedener Pfandobjecte desselben und verschiedener Gläubiger.No one is held to be barred to whom the Prætor promises to grant complete restitution.

6Ul­pia­nus li­bro ter­tio de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. Non so­lum mi­no­ris, ve­rum eo­rum quo­que, qui rei pu­bli­cae cau­sa afue­runt, item om­nium, qui ip­si po­tue­runt re­sti­tui in in­te­grum, suc­ces­so­res in in­te­grum re­sti­tui pos­sunt, et ita sae­pis­si­me est con­sti­tu­tum. si­ve igi­tur he­res sit si­ve is cui he­redi­tas re­sti­tu­ta est si­ve fi­lii fa­mi­lias mi­li­tis suc­ces­sor, in in­te­grum re­sti­tui pot­erit. pro­in­de et si mi­nor in ser­vi­tu­tem red­iga­tur vel an­cil­la fiat, do­mi­nis eo­rum da­bi­tur non ul­tra tem­pus sta­tu­tum in in­te­grum re­sti­tu­tio. sed et si for­te hic mi­nor erat cap­tus in he­redi­ta­te quam ad­ie­rit, Iu­lia­nus li­bro sep­ti­mo de­ci­mo di­ges­to­rum scri­bit abs­ti­nen­di fa­cul­ta­tem do­mi­num pos­se ha­be­re non so­lum ae­ta­tis be­ne­fi­cio, ve­rum et si ae­tas non pa­tro­ci­ne­tur: quia non apis­cen­dae he­redi­ta­tis gra­tia le­gum be­ne­fi­cio usi sunt, sed vin­dic­tae gra­tia.

6Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XIII. Complete restitution may be granted to the successors of minors, as well as to the successors of those who are absent on public business, and, in fact, of all those who were themselves entitled to complete restitution; and this has very frequently been decided. Therefore, an heir, or a person to whom an estate has been delivered, or the successor of the son of a family who was a soldier, can obtain complete restitution. Hence if a minor of either sex is reduced to slavery, complete restitution will be granted to his or her master, within the time prescribed by law. But if it should happen that such a minor was overreached with reference to an estate which he had entered upon, Julianus says, in the Seventeenth Book of the Digest, that his master will have the right to reject it, not only on the ground of youth, but even where youth cannot be alleged; because patrons have used the benefit of the laws not for the sake of obtaining an estate, but for the purpose of revenge.

7Mar­cel­lus li­bro ter­tio di­ges­to­rum. Di­vus An­to­ni­nus Mar­cio Avi­to prae­to­ri de suc­cur­ren­do ei, qui ab­sens rem amis­e­rat, in hanc sen­ten­tiam re­scrip­sit: ‘Et­si ni­hil fa­ci­le mu­tan­dum est ex sol­lem­ni­bus, ta­men ubi ae­qui­tas evi­dens pos­cit, sub­ve­nien­dum est. ita­que si ci­ta­tus non re­spon­dit et ob hoc mo­re pro­nun­tia­tum est, con­fes­tim au­tem pro tri­bu­na­li te se­den­te ad­iit: ex­is­ti­ma­ri pot­est non sua cul­pa sed pa­rum ex­au­di­ta vo­ce prae­co­nis de­fuis­se, id­eo­que re­sti­tui pot­est.’ 1Nec in­tra has so­lum spe­cies con­sis­tet hu­ius ge­ne­ris au­xi­lium: et­enim de­cep­tis si­ne cul­pa sua, ma­xi­me si fraus ab ad­ver­sa­rio in­ter­ve­ne­rit, suc­cur­ri opor­te­bit, cum et­iam de do­lo ma­lo ac­tio com­pe­te­re so­leat, et bo­ni prae­to­ris est po­tius re­sti­tue­re li­tem, ut et ra­tio et ae­qui­tas pos­tu­la­bit, quam ac­tio­nem fa­mo­sam con­sti­tue­re, ad quam tunc de­mum de­scen­den­dum est, cum re­me­dio lo­cus es­se non pot­est.

7Marcellus, Digest, Book III. The Divine Antoninus made the following statement in a Rescript addressed to Marcius Avitus, the Prætor, on the subject of relieving a person who had lost his property while absent: “Although changes should not be readily made in matters which have been solemnly established, still, where equity clearly demands it, relief must be granted; and therefore, where a party who was summoned did not appear, and on this account judgment was formally rendered against him, and he soon afterwards appeared before the court where you were presiding; it may be supposed that his non-appearance was due, not so much to his own fault, as to the imperfectly heard voice of the crier, and therefore he is entitled to restitution.” 1Ad Dig. 4,1,7,1Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 118, Note 6.The aid of the Emperor does not seem to be limited to cases of this kind alone, for relief should be granted to persons who have been deceived without their own fault, and especially where fraud was committed by their adversaries, since it is usual for an action based upon fraud to be requested; and it is the duty of a just prætor to grant a new trial, which both reason and justice demand, rather than to allow an action involving turpitude to be brought, which should be resorted to only when no other remedy is available.

8Ma­cer li­bro se­cun­do de ap­pel­la­tio­ni­bus. In­ter mi­no­res vi­gin­ti quin­que an­nis et eos qui rei pu­bli­cae cau­sa ab­sunt hoc in­ter­est, quod mi­no­res an­nis et­iam qui per tu­to­res cu­ra­to­res­ve suos de­fen­si sunt, ni­hi­lo mi­nus in in­te­grum con­tra rem pu­bli­cam re­sti­tuun­tur, co­gni­ta sci­li­cet cau­sa: ei ve­ro qui rei pu­bli­cae cau­sa ab­sit, ce­te­ris quo­que qui in ea­dem cau­sa ha­ben­tur, si per pro­cu­ra­to­res suos de­fen­si sunt, hac­te­nus in in­te­grum re­sti­tu­tio­ne sub­ve­ni­ri so­let, ut ap­pel­la­re his per­mit­ta­tur.

8Macer, On Appeals, Book III. This difference exists between the case of minors under twenty-live years of age and parties who are absent on public business, namely: minors, even where they are defended by their guardians and curators, may still obtain complete restitution against the State, that is, where proper cause is shown; but where anyone is absent on public business, or where others who enjoy the same privilege, if they are defended by their agents, are usually only relieved by complete restitution to the extent of being permitted to appeal.