« PreviousContinue »
intelligitur. Ideo autem non proprie ex maleficio obligatus intelligitur, quia pleriimque ob alterius culpam tenetur. aut servi aut liberi. Cui similis est is, qui ei parte, qua vulgo iter fieri solet, id positum aut suspensum habet, quod potest, si ceciderit, alicui nocere; quo casu poena decem aureorum constituta est . De eo vero, quod dejectum effusumve est, dupli, quantum damni datum sit, constituta est actio. Ob hominem vero liberum occisum, quinquaginta aureorum poena constituitur. Si vero vivat, nocitumque ei esse dicatur, quantum ob eam rem aequum judici videtur, actio datur. Judex enim computare debet mercedes medicis praestitas, caeteraque impendia, quDe in curatione facta sunt: praeterea operas, quibus caruit aut cariturus est, ob id, quod inutilis est factus.
whether the chamber be his property; whether he rents it; or inhabits it gratis: and the reason r why such occupier is not suable for a direct mal-feasance, is, because he is generally sued for the fault of another. Any man is also subject to the same action, who hath hung or placed anything in a public road, so as to endanger passengers by the full of it; in which case a fine of ten aurei is appointed: but, when anything hath been thrown or split, the action is always for double the actual damage. If a freeman be killed by accident, the penalty is fifty aurei; but, if he only receive some hurt, the quantum of the damage is at the discretion of the judge, who ought to take into account the fees of the physician, and all other expenses attendant upon the cure, over and above the time, which the patient hath lost in his illness, or may lose by being unable to pursue his business.
Dc filio-familias, seorsum habitante a patro.
$ II. Si filius-familias seorsum a patre habitaverit, et quid ex coenaculo ejus dejectum effusumve fuerit, sive quid positum suspensumve habuerit, cujus casus periculosus est, Juliano placuit, in patrem nullam esse actionem, sed cum ipso filio agendum esse. Quod et in filio-familias judice observandum est, qui litem suam fecerit.
$ 2 If the son of a family live separate from his father, and anything is either thrown, or split, from his apartment, or so hungr or placed, that the fall of it may be dangerous, it is the opinion of Julian, that no action will lie against the father, and that the son only can be sued. The same rule of law is also to be observed, in regard to the son of a family, who hath given as a judge, an unjust decision.
Dc damno aut furto, quod in navi, aut caupona, aut stabulo,
$ III. Item exercilor navis, aut cauponae, aut stabuli, de damno aut furto, quod in navi, aut caupona, aut stabulo, factum erit, quasi ex maleficio teneri videtur; si modo ipsius nullum est maleficium, sed alicujus corum, quorum opera navem, aut cauponam, aut stabulum, exercet. Cum enim neque ex maleficio, neque ex contractu, sit adversus eum constituta hie actio, et aliquatenus culpae reus est, quod opera malorum hominum utcretur, ideo quasi ex maleficio teneri videtur. In his autem casibus in factum actio competit; quae haeredi quidem datur, adversus haeredem autem nou competit.
$ 3. The master of a ship, tavern or inn, is liable to be sued for a gwai-i-mal-feasance, on account of every damage, or theft, done or committed in any of these places, by himself or his servants: for although no action, either of direct mal-feasance, or of contract, can be brought against the master, yet, as he has, in some measure, been guilty of a fault in employing dishonest persons as his servants, he is therefore subject to a suit for a quasi-mal-feasance. But, in all these cases, the action given is an action upon thefaci, which may be brought in favour of an heir, but not against him.
Conttnuatio, et Dcfinitio.
SUPEREST, ut de actionibus It now remains, that we treat of
loquamur. Actio nihil aliud est, actions. An action is nothing more
quam jus persequendi in judicio, than the right of suing in a court
quod sibi debetur. of law for our just demands.
$ 1. Omnium autem actionnm, $ 1. All actions whatever he the quibus inter aliquos apud judices subject matter of them whether dearbitrosve de quacunque re quceri- terminable before judges or referees Do actione confessoria, et negatoria.
tur, summa divisio in duo genera deducitnr: ant enim in rem sunt, aut in personam: namquc agit unusquisque aut cum eo, qui ei obligatus est, vel ex contractu, vel ex nialeficio; quo casu proditae sunt acliones in personam, per quas intendit, adversarium ci dare aut facere opportere, et aliis quibusdam modis: aut cum eo agit, qui nullo jure ei obligatus est, movet tamen alicui de aliquii re controversiam; quo casu proditae actiones in rem sunt: veluti si rem corporalem possideat quis, quam Titius suam esse affirmet possessor autem, dominum ejus se esse, dicat; nam. si Titius suam esse intendat, in rem actio est.
may be divided into real and personal; for the plaintiff must sue the defendant, either because the defendant is obligated to him by contract, or hath been guilty of somfi malfeasance: and, in this case, the action must be personal, in which the plaintiff alleges, that his adversary is bound to give, or to do something for his benefit; or some other matter, as the occasion requires; or otherwise, the plaintiff must sue the defendant, on account of some corporeal thing, when there is no obligation; in which case the action must be real; as for example, if a man possess land, which Titius affirms to be his property, the other denying it, Titius must bring a real action for the recovery.
$ II. iEque, si agat quis, jus sibi esse fundo forte, vel aedibus utendi fruendi, vel per fundum vicini eundi agendi, vel ex fundo vicini aquam ducendi in rem actio est. Ejusdem generis est actio de jure praediorum urbanorum; veluti, si quis agat, jus sibi esse altius aides suas tollendi, prospiciendive, vel projiciendi aliquid, vel immittendi lignum in vicini aides. Contra quoque de usufructu, et dc servitutibus praediorum rusticorum, item praediorum urbanorum, invicem quoque proditoe sunt actiones; ut si quis intendat, jusnon esse adversario utendi fruendi, eundi agendi, aquamvc ducendi; item altius tolendi, prospiciendive, vel projiciendi, immit
$ 2. Also, if any man sue, alleging that he has a right to the usufruct of a field or house, or a right of driving his cattle, or of drawing water in the land of his neighbor, this is a real action. And an action relating to the rights of houses or city estates, which rights are called services, is also of the same kind; as when a man commences a suit, and alleges, that he has a right of prospect, a right to raise his house, aright of making a part of it project, or of laying the beams of his building upon his neighbor's walls. There are also actions different from these, which relate to usufructs, and the rights of country and city estates; as when
tendive: istae quoque actiones in rem sunt, sed negative; quod genus actionis in controvcrsiis rerum corporalium proditum non est; nam in his is agit, qui non possidet; ei verd, qui possidet, non est actio prodita, per quam neget rem actoris esse. Sane non uno casu, qui possidet, nihilominus is actoris partes obtinet; sicut in latioribus digestorum libris opportunius apparebit.
the complainant alleges, that his adversary is not entitled to the usufruct of a particular ground, or to the right of passage, &c. &c. These actions are also real, but are negative in their nature, and cannot therefore be used in controversies respecting things corporeal, where the agent, or plaintiff, is the person out of possession: for a possessor can bring no action: there are however, many cases, in which a possessor may be obliged to act the part of a plaintiff; but we refer the reader to the book of the digests.
De actionibus preetoriis realibus.
$ III. Sed istae quidem actiones, quarum mentionem habuimus, et si quae sunt similes, ex legitimis et civilibus causis descendunt. Alias autem sunt, quas praetor ex sua jurisdictione, comparatas habet, tam in rem, quam in personam; quas et ipsas necessarium est exemplis ostendere; ut ecce plerumque ita permittit practor in rem agere, ut vel actor dicat, se quasi usucepisse, quod non usuceperit vel ex diverso possessor dicat, adversarium suum non usucepisse, quod usuceperit.
$ 3. The actions just mentioned and those of a similar nature, are derived from the civil law; but the praetor, by virtue of his jurisdiction, hath introduced other actions, both real and personal, of which it will be necessary to give some examples: for he often permits a real action to be brought, either by allowing the demandant to allege, that he hath acquired by prescription, what he hath not so acquired; or, on the contrary, by permitting a former possessor to allege, that his adversary hath not acquired by prescription, what, in reality, he hath so acquired.
$ IV. Namque, si cui ex justa $ 4. If anything should be deliv
causa res aliqua tradita fuerit, (ve- ered to or deposited with a man in
luti ex causa emptionis, aut dona- trust upon some just account, as by
tionis, aut dotis, aut legatorum,) et reason of a purchase, a gift, a mar
necdum ejus rei dominus effectus riage, or a bequest, and the trustee
est, si is ejus re possessionem casu should lose the possession, before he De rescissoria.
amiserit, nullam habet in rem directam actionem ad eam perscquendam: quippe ita proditac sunt jure civili actiones, nt quis dominium suum vindicet. Sed, quia sane durum erat, eo casu deficere actionem, inventa est i practore actio, in qui dicit is, qui possessionem amisit, eam rem se usucepisse, quam usu non cepit, et ita vindicat suam esse: quae actio Publiciana appeilatur, quoniam primum k Publicib practore in edicto proposita est.
hath gained a property in the thing possessed, he could have no direct action for the recovery of it; inasmuch as real actions are given by law for the re-vindication of those things only, in which a man hath a vested property or dominion. But, it being hard, that an action should be wanting in such a case, the praetor bath supplied one, in which the person, who hath lost his possession, is allowed to prescribe to the thing in question, although he did not obtain it by prescription, and he may thus recover. This action is called actio Publiciana, because it was first instituted by the edict of Publicus the praetor.
$ V. Rursus ex diverso, si quis. cum reipublicae causa abesset, vel in hostium potestate esset, rem ejus, qui in civitate esset, usuceperit, permititur domino, si possessor reipublicae causa abesse desierit, tunc intra annum rescissa usuca. pioue eam rem petere, id est, ita petere, ut dicat, possessorum usu non cepisse, et ob id suam rem esse. Quod genus actionis quibusdanvet aliis simili aequitate motus praetor accommodat; sicut ex latiore digestorum seu pandectarum volumine intelligere licet .
$ 5. On the contrary, if any man, while abroad in the service of his country, or a prisoner in the hands of the enemy, should gain a prescriptive title to a thing, which belongs to another person resident at home, then the former proprietor is permitted within a year after the return of the possessor from public service, to bring an action against him, the prescriptive title being rescinded; and may allege, that the possessor hath not effectually prescribed, so that the thing in litigation is his own. Under the same motive of equity the praetor hath adapted this species of action to certain other persons, as we may learn more at large from the digests.