« PreviousContinue »
De interdicto recuperandae, et affinibus remediis.
§ VI. Recuperandae possessionis causã solet interdici, si quis ex possessione fundi vel odium vi dejectus fuerit; nam ei proponitur interdictum Unde vi, per quod is, qui dejecet, cogitur ei restituere possessionem, licet is ab eo, qui vi dejecit, vi, clam, vel precarió, possideat. Sed ex constitutionibus sacris, (ut supra diximus,) si quis rem per vim occupaverit, siquidem in bonis ejus est, dominio ejus privatur; si aliena, post ejus restitutionem, etiam aestimationem rei dare vim passo compellitur. Gui autem aliquem de possessione per vim dejecerit, tenetur lege Julia de vi privatā, aut de vi publica. Sed de vi privatā, si sine armis vim fecerit; sin autem armis eum de possessione vi expulerit, de vi publică tenetur. Armorum autem appellatione non solum scuta et gladios et galeas, sed et fustes et lapides, significari intelligimus.
§ 6. The interdict for recovery of possession, is generally employed, when any one hath been forcibly ousted from the possession of his house or estate; who then becomes entitled to the interdict Unde vi, by which the intruder is compelled to restore him to possession, although he, who had been thus forcibly ousted, was himself in possession by clandestine means, by force, or precariously. But, as we have said before, the imperial constitutions provide, that, whoever seizes a thing by force, if it be his own, he shall lose his property in it; and, if it belong to another, he shall be compelled not only to make restitution, but to pay the full valise to the party, who suffered the force. But whoever ousts another of possession by force, is likewise suiject to the law Juliã de vi privatā, or de vi publică : if the seizing or intrusion was effected without weapons, then the offender is only liable to the law de vi privatā ; but, if by an armed force, he is then subject to the law de vi publică. We comprehend not only shields swords, and helmets under the term: arms, but also clubs and stones.
- Divisio tertia.
§ VII. Tertia divisio interdictorum est, quod aut simplicia sunt, aut duplicia. Simplicia sunt, veluti in quibus alter actor, alter reus est; qualia sunt omnia restitutoria, aut exhibitoria; nam actor is est, qui
§ 7. The third division of interdicts is into simple and double; the simple are those, in which there is both a plaintiff and a defendant; and of this sort are all restoratory and exhibitory interdicts : for the plain
378 LIB. IV.
desiderit aut exhiberi aut restitui ; reus autem is est, à quo desideratur, ut restituat, aut exhibeat. Prohibitoriorum autem interdictorum alia simplicia sunt, alia duplicia. Simplicia sunt, veluti cum praetor prohibet in loco sacro, vel in flumine publico, ripáve ejus, aliquid fieri: nam actor est, qui desiderat, ne quid fiat; reus est, qui aliquid facere conatur. luti Uti possidetis interdictum, et Otrubi. Ideo autem duplicia vocantur, quia par utriusque litigatoris in his conditio est; nec quisquam praecipue reus vel actor intelligitur, sed unusquisque tam rei, quam actoris partes sustinet.
Duplicia sunt, ve
De ordine et vetere exitu.
§ VIII. De ordine et vetere exitu interdictorum supervacuum est hodie dicere; nam quoties extra ordinem jus dicitur, (qualia sunt hodie omnia judicia,) non est mecesse reddi interdictum : sed perinde judicatur sine interdictis, ac si utilis actio ex causā interdicti reddita fuisset.
§ 8. It would be superfluous at this day to speak of the order, and ancient effect of interdicts; for when judgments are extraordinary, (as all judgments now are ) an interdict becomes unnecessary. judgments are therefore now delivered without interdicts, in like manner, as if a beneficial action were given in consequence of an interdict.
§ I. Ecce enim jusjurandum omnibus, qui conveniuntur, ex constitutione nostră defertur; nam reus non aliter suis allegationibus utitur, nisi prius juraverit, quod, putans se bonā instantiã uti, ad contradicendum pervenit. At, adversus inficiantes, ex quibusdam causis dupli actio constituitur ; veluti si damni injuriae, aut legatorum locis venerabilibus relictorum, nomine agatur. Statim autem ab initio pluris quam simpli est actio; veluti furti manifesti, quadrupli; nec manifesti, dupli: nam exhis, et aliis quibusdam causis, sive quis neget, sive fateatur, pluris quam simpli est actio. Item actoris quoque calumnia coercetur; nam etiam actor pro calumniä jurare cogitur ex nostrā constitutione, quod non calumniandi animo litem movisset, sed existimando, se bonam causam ha
§ 1. By virtue of one of our constitutions, an oath must be administered to every man against whom an action is brought; for a defendant may not plead, until he hath first sworn, that he proceeds upon a firm, belief that his cause is good. But actions lie, in particular cases, for double and triple value against those who deny the cause of action; as when a suit is commenced on account of injurious damage, or for a legacy left to a sacred place, as a church, hospital, &c. There are also actions, upon which more than the simple value is recoverable at the time of their commencement; as upon an action of theft manifest, which is for fourfold the value; an action of theft not manifest, for double the value; because in these, and some other cases, the action is at first given for more than the simple value, whe
bere. Utriusque etiam partis advocati jusjurandum subeunt, quod alià nostra constitutione comprehensum est. Haec autem omnia proveteri calumnia actione introducta sunt, quae in desuetudinem abiit; quia in partem deciman litis actores multabat, quod nusquam factum esse invenimus: sed pro his introductum est et praefatum jusjurandum, et ut improbus litigator et damnum et impensas litis inferre adversario suo cogatur.
§ II. Ex quibusdam judiciis damnati ignominiosi fiunt; veluti furti, vi bonorum raptorum injuriarum, de dolo; item tutelae, mandati, depositi, directis, non contrariis actionibus : item pro socio, quae ab utrāque parte directä est; et ob id quilibet ex sociis, eo judicio damnatus, ignominiã notatur. Sed furtiquidem, aut vi bonorum raptorum, aut injuriarum, aut de dolo, non solum damnati notantur ignominia, sed et pacti; et recte: plurimum enim interest, utrum ex de
ther the defendant denies or confesses the charge brought against him. The calumny of the plaintiff is also under restraint; for he too is compelled by our constitution to swear, that he did not commence the suit with an intention to calumniate ; but upon thorough considence that he had a good cause : and, the ad
- - - o vocates on both sides are likewise
compellable to take a similar oath, the substance of which is set forth in another of our constitutions. This practice hath been introduced in the place of the ancient action of calumny, which compelled the plaintiff to pay the tenth part of his demand as a punishment, but is now disused; and, instead of it, we have introduced the before-mentioned oath, and have ordained, that every rash litigant, who hath failed in his proof, shall be compelled to pay his adversary the damages and costs of Stuzt.
licto aliquis, an ex contractu, debitor sit.
De in jus vocando.
§ III. Omnium autem actionum instituendarum principium ab eå parte edicti proficiscitur, quá praetor edicit de in jus vocando. Utique enim in primis adversarius in jus vocandus est; id est, ad eum vocandus, qui jus dicturus sit. Quà parte praetor parentibus patronis, item parentibus liberisque patronorum et patronarum, hunc præstat honorem, ut non alitër liceat liberis libertisque eos in jus vocare, quam si id ab ipso praetore postulaverint et impetraverint. Et, si quis alitèr vocaverit, in eum poenam solidorum quinquaginta constituit.
are rendered infamous ; but those also, who have bargained to prevent a criminal prosecution ; and this is a right; for there is a wide difference between a debtor, on account of a debtor upon contract.
§ 3. All actions take their rise from that part of the praetor's edict, in which he treats de in jus vocando of calling parties into court: for ‘the first step in matters of controversy, is to cite the adverse party to appear before the judge, who is to determine the cause. In the same part of the edict, the practor hath treated parents and patrons, and even the parents and children of patrons and patronesses, with so great respect, that he does not suffer them to be called into judgment by their children or their freedmen, until application hath been first made to him, and leave obtained; and, if any man presume to cite such persons otherwise, he is subject to a penalty of