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. XLIX9,
An per alium causae appellationum reddi possunt
Liber quadragesimus nonus
IX.

An per alium causae appellationum reddi possunt

(Whether the Reasons for an Appeal Can be Presented by Another.)

1Ul­pia­nus li­bro quar­to ap­pel­la­tio­num. Quae­ri so­let, an per alium cau­sae ap­pel­la­tio­nis red­di pos­sunt: quae res in re­bus pe­cu­nia­riis et in cri­mi­ni­bus agi­ta­ri con­sue­vit. et in re­bus pe­cu­nia­riis sunt re­scrip­ta pos­se agi. ver­ba re­scrip­ti ita se ha­bent: ‘Di­vi fra­tres Lon­gi­no. Si ti­bi qui ap­pel­la­vit man­da­vit, ut eum de ap­pel­la­tio­ne, quam Pol­lia ad eum fe­cit, de­fen­de­res, et res pe­cu­nia­ria est: ni­hil pro­hi­bet no­mi­ne eius te re­spon­de­re. sin au­tem non sit pe­cu­nia­ria cau­sa, sed ca­pi­ta­lis, per pro­cu­ra­to­rem agi non li­cet. sed et si ea cau­sa sit, ex qua se­qui so­let poe­na us­que ad rele­ga­tio­nem, non opor­tet per alium cau­sas agi, sed ip­sum ad­es­se au­di­to­rio de­be­re scien­dum est’. pla­ne si pe­cu­nia­ria cau­sa est, ex qua igno­mi­nia se­qui­tur, pot­est et per pro­cu­ra­to­rem hoc agi. id­que erit pro­ban­dum et in ip­so ac­cu­sa­to­re, si ap­pel­la­ve­rit vel si ad­ver­sus eum sit ap­pel­la­tum. et ge­ne­ra­li­ter quae cau­sa per alium agi non pot­est, eius nec ap­pel­la­tio­nem per alium agi opor­tet.

1Ulpianus, Appeals, Book IV. It is frequently asked whether the reasons for an appeal can be stated by another person, and this point is usually discussed in pecuniary and criminal cases. It is established by Rescripts that this can be done in pecuniary cases. The terms of one Rescript are as follows: “The Divine Brothers, to Longinus. If he who appealed directed you to defend him against the appeal which Pollia took against him, and the case is a pecuniary one, there is nothing to prevent you from answering in his name. If, however, the case is not a pecuniary one, but one involving the punishment of death, it is not permitted to proceed by an attorney. But if it is one in which a penalty as serious as relegation can be enforced, it is not necessary to act by another, but it should be noted that the party himself must appear in court.” It is clear that if the case is a pecuniary one, from which infamy may result, it can be conducted by means of an attorney. This opinion should be adopted, not only if the accuser should appeal, but also with reference to him against whom the appeal was taken; and, generally speaking, an appeal cannot be taken by another in any case where one person cannot appear by another.

2Ma­cer li­bro se­cun­do de ap­pel­la­tio­ni­bus. Si pro­cu­ra­tor ab­sen­tis ap­pel­la­ve­rit, de­in­de ra­tio­nes red­di­de­rit, ni­hi­lo mi­nus ip­se re­spon­de­re de­bet. sed an eo ces­san­te do­mi­nus li­tis re­spon­de­re pos­sit ex­em­plo ad­ules­cen­tis, vi­dea­mus: ma­gis ta­men ob­ser­va­tur, ut au­di­ri de­beat in cau­sis ap­pel­la­tio­nis red­den­dis is, cu­ius ab­sen­tis pro­cu­ra­tor ap­pel­la­vit.

2Macer, Appeals, Book II. When the attorney of an absent party appeals, and afterwards gives his reasons for doing so, he will, nevertheless, be obliged to answer. If, however, he fails to do so, can the party to the suit answer, as in the case of a minor? is a question which we should consider. We rather incline to the opinion that he ought to be heard in giving the reasons for the appeal, who, as the attorney of the absent party, applied for it.