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. XXXVIII15,
Quis ordo in possessionibus servetur
Liber trigesimus octavus
XV.

Quis ordo in possessionibus servetur

(What Order is to be Observed in Granting Prætorian Possession.)

1Mo­des­ti­nus li­bro sex­to pan­dec­ta­rum. In­tes­ta­ti hi gra­dus vo­can­tur: pri­mum sui he­redes, se­cun­do le­gi­ti­mi, ter­tio pro­xi­mi co­gna­ti, de­in­de vir et uxor. 1Si­ve ta­bu­lae tes­ta­men­ti non ex­stent, si­ve ex­stent, si se­cun­dum eas vel con­tra eas bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem ne­mo ac­ce­pit, in­tes­ta­ti de­tur bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio. 2In­tes­ta­ti pa­tris li­be­ris bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio da­tur non tan­tum his, qui in po­tes­ta­tem pa­ren­tis us­que in mor­tis tem­pus fue­runt, sed em­an­ci­pa­tis.

1Modestinus, Pandects, Book VI. The following are the degrees of prætorian possession on the ground of intestacy: first, that of the proper heirs; second, that of the heirs at law; third, that of the next of kin; finally that of husband and wife. 1Prætorian possession on the ground of intestacy is granted where there is no will, or where there is one and no application is made for possession of the estate either in accordance with the provisions of the will, or in opposition to them. 2Prætorian possession of the estate of a father dying intestate is granted to his children; not only to such as were under his control at the time of his death, but also to those who have been emancipated.

2Ul­pia­nus li­bro qua­dra­gen­si­mo no­no ad edic­tum. Uti­le tem­pus est bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­num ad­mit­ten­da­rum: ita au­tem uti­le tem­pus est, ut sin­gu­li dies in eo uti­les sint, sci­li­cet ut per sin­gu­los dies et scie­rit et po­tue­rit ad­mit­te­re: ce­te­rum qua­cum­que die ne­scie­rit aut non po­tue­rit, nul­la du­bi­ta­tio est, quin dies ei non ce­dat. fie­ri au­tem pot­est, ut qui in­itio scie­rit vel po­tue­rit bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem ad­mit­te­re, hic in­ci­piat ne­sci­re vel non pos­se ad­mit­te­re: sci­li­cet si, cum in­itio co­gno­vis­set eum in­tes­ta­tum de­ces­sis­se, post­ea qua­si cer­tio­re nun­tio al­la­to du­bi­ta­re coe­pe­rit, num­quid tes­ta­tus de­ces­se­rit vel num­quid vi­vat, quia hic ru­mor post­ea per­rep­se­rat. idem et in con­tra­rium ac­ci­pi pot­est, ut qui igno­ra­vit in­itio, post­ea sci­re in­ci­piat. 1Dies bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nis uti­les es­se pa­lam est: sed non ses­sio­num nu­me­ra­bun­tur, si mo­do ea sit bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio, quae de pla­no pe­ti po­tuit. quod si ea, quae cau­sae co­gni­tio­nem pro tri­bu­na­li de­si­de­rat vel quae de­cre­tum ex­pos­cit, ses­sio­nes erunt no­bis com­pu­tan­dae, qui­bus se­dit is qui­bus­que per ip­sum prae­to­rem fac­tum non est, quo mi­nus da­ret bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem. 2In bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­ne, quae pro tri­bu­na­li da­tur, il­lud quae­ri­tur, si se­dit qui­dem prae­tor pro tri­bu­na­li, sed pos­tu­la­tio­ni­bus non de­dit: pot­est di­ci tem­pus ad bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem non ce­de­re, cum prae­ses aliis re­bus aut mi­li­ta­ri­bus aut cus­to­diis aut co­gni­tio­ni­bus fue­rit oc­cu­pa­tus. 3Si prae­ses pro­vin­ciae in pro­xi­ma fuit ci­vi­ta­te, ac­ce­de­re de­bet ad uti­li­ta­tem tem­po­ris ra­tio iti­ne­ris, sci­li­cet nu­me­ra­tio­ne vi­gin­ti mi­lium pas­suum fac­ta: nec enim ex­spec­ta­re de­be­mus, ut prae­ses pro­vin­ciae ve­niat ad eum, qui bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem pe­ti­tu­rus est. 4Si ven­ter in pos­ses­sio­nem mis­sus sit, bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nis tem­pus non ce­de­re se­quen­ti­bus ne­qua­quam amb­igen­dum est, nec tan­tum in­tra cen­ten­si­mum diem, ve­rum et­iam quam­diu nas­ci pos­sit: nam et si na­tus fue­rit, an­te ei de­fer­ri bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem scien­dum est. 5Scien­tiam eam ob­ser­van­dam Pom­po­nius ait, non quae ca­dit in iu­ris pru­den­tes, sed quam quis aut per se aut per alios ad­se­qui po­tuit, sci­li­cet con­su­len­do pru­den­tio­res, ut di­li­gen­tio­rem pa­trem fa­mi­lias con­su­le­re dig­num sit.

2Ad Dig. 38,15,2Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 104, Note 7.Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XLIX. The time for claiming prætorian possession of the estate is an available one. It is designated available, because all the days of which it is composed can be taken advantage of; that is to say, all the days are included on which he who was entitled to the succession had knowledge of, and could have accepted it. There is no doubt, however, that the days on which he did not know of the succession, or could not have demanded it, are not included. Still, it may happen that where the person interested was aware of the facts, or could have claimed possession in the first place, was subsequently misinformed, or thought that he had no right to acquire possession; for instance, if he knew from the beginning that the owner of the property had died intestate, and afterwards doubted whether this was the case, or whether he died testate, or whether he was still living; because a rumor of this kind was afterwards circulated. On the other hand, it may also happen that a person who at first was ignorant that he had a right to the succession may afterwards ascertain that he was entitled to it. 1It is clear that while the days prescribed for demanding prætorian possession of an estate are available ones, those during which court is in session are not included, provided the prætorian possession is of such a nature that it can be demanded without ceremony. But what if the possession is such that it requires an investigation by a tribunal, or a decree of the Prætor? In this instance, the days of the session of the tribunal during which the Prætor has rendered his decision, and on which nothing has been done by him to prevent possession of the estate from being granted, must be computed. 2With reference to the prætorian possession of an estate which is granted in court, inquiry is made whether the Prætor presided in his tribunal, and did not grant possession to the parties demanding it; for it must be said that the time for obtaining possession does not begin to run while the presiding magistrate is occupied with other matters, either those relating to military affairs, or the custody of prisoners, or special investigations. 3If the Governor of the province was in the neighboring town, the time required for making the journey must be added to that prescribed by law, that is to say, by allowing twenty thousand paces to a day; nor should we expect the Governor of the province to come to the home of him who claims possession of the estate. 4When an unborn child is placed in possession, there is no doubt that the prescribed time for demanding it should not run against those in the next degree, not only during the hundred days, but also for the time during which the child may be born; for it must be remembered that, even if he is born before this time, prætorian possession will be granted him. 5Pomponius says that the knowledge which is necessary is not such as is exacted from persons learned in the law, but is what anyone can acquire, either by himself or through others; that is to say, by taking the advice of persons learned in the law, as the diligent head of the household should do.

3Pau­lus li­bro qua­dra­gen­si­mo quar­to ad edic­tum. Cir­ca tem­po­ra bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nis pa­tris scien­tia igno­ran­ti fi­lio non no­cet.

3Paulus, On the Edict, Book XLIV. The knowledge of the father with reference to prætorian possession will not prejudice the rights of a son in such a way as to make the prescribed time run against him, if he is not informed.

4Iu­lia­nus li­bro vi­cen­si­mo oc­ta­vo di­ges­to­rum. Si co­he­redi tuo sub­sti­tu­tus fuis­ses et bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem ac­ce­pe­ris, quan­do­que co­he­res tuus con­sti­tue­rit nol­le pe­te­re bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem, ti­bi da­ta to­ta in­tel­le­gi­tur, co­he­res tuus am­plius pe­ten­dae bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nis fa­cul­ta­tem non ha­be­bit. 1Fi­lius non so­lum si tam­quam fi­lius, sed et si tam­quam ad­gna­tus vel tam­quam co­gna­tus ad bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem vo­ca­tur, an­nuum spa­tium ha­bet: sic­uti pa­ter, qui fi­lium ma­nu­mi­sis­set, quam­vis ut ma­nu­mis­sor bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem ac­ci­piat, ta­men ad bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem ac­ci­pien­dam an­nuum spa­tium ha­bet.

4Julianus, Digest, Book XXVIII. If you have been substituted for your co-heir, and you obtain possession of an estate, and your co-heir determines not to demand possession of the same, the entire possession will be understood to be given to you, and your co-heir will not even have the power of afterwards claiming possession. 1A son is entitled to the term of one year in which to demand possession, not only where he does so as a son, but where he demands it as an agnate, or a cognate; just as where a father manumits his son, and although he may demand possession of the estate, as having been manumitted, still, he will be entitled to a term of a year in which to do so.

5Mar­cel­lus li­bro no­no di­ges­to­rum. Cum fi­lio fa­mi­lias bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio de­la­ta est, dies, qui­bus cer­tio­ra­re pa­trem non pot­est, ut vel iu­beat ad­gnos­ci bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem vel ra­tam ha­beat agni­tio­nem bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nis, non ce­dunt. fin­ga­mus sta­tim pri­mo die, quo fue­rit de­la­ta, ad­gno­vis­se eum bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem, cer­tio­ra­re pa­trem, ut com­pro­bet, non pos­se, non ce­dent dies cen­tum: in­ci­pient au­tem ce­de­re, cum cer­tior fie­ri po­tuit. prae­teritis au­tem cen­tum die­bus frus­tra ra­tum ha­be­bit. 1Quae­ri pot­est, si, cum pos­set fi­lius pe­te­re bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem, pa­tre ita ab­sen­te, ut cer­tio­ra­re eum non pos­sit, vel et­iam fu­ren­te, pe­te­re neg­le­xe­rit, an pe­ti am­plius non pos­sit. sed quid no­ceat non pe­ti­tam bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nem, quae, si pe­ti­ta es­set, ta­men non an­te ad­quire­re­tur, quam pa­ter com­pro­bas­set? 2Si ser­vus alie­nus he­res in­sti­tu­tus venis­set, quae­ri­tur, an pos­te­rio­ri do­mi­no dies bo­no­rum pos­ses­sio­nis pe­ten­dae im­pu­ta­ri opor­te­ret. et pla­cet, quan­tum prio­ri do­mi­no su­per­fue­rit, ei im­pu­ta­ri.

5Marcellus, Digest, Book IX. Where prætorian possession of an estate is granted to a son under paternal control, the days on which he is unable to notify his father, so that the latter may either direct him to accept possession, or ratify the possession which has already taken place, will not run against him. Suppose that, on the first day when he knew that he was entitled to prætorian possession of the estate he had accepted it, and could not notify his father in order that he might approve of what he had done, the hundred days will not run against him. They will, however, begin to run from the date when his father could have been informed, but, after the hundred days have elapsed, the ratification will be void. 1It may be asked if, when a son was able to demand prætorian possession of an estate, his father was absent so that he could not notify him; or if he was insane, and the son should neglect to demand possession, whether he could do so afterwards. But how can it prejudice his rights, if the possession of the estate was not demanded, when, if this had been done, it could not have been obtained unless the father had ratified the act? 2If a slave belonging to another is appointed heir, and then is sold by his master, the question arises whether the days prescribed for demanding prætorian possession must be considered to run against the new master. It is settled that the time to which the former master was entitled will run against him.