De interdictis sive extraordinariis actionibus, quae pro his competunt
(Concerning interdicts or the extraordinary proceedings to which they give rise.)
1 Ulpianus libro sexagensimo septimo ad edictum. Videamus, de quibus rebus interdicta competunt. et sciendum est interdicta aut de divinis rebus aut de humanis competere. divinis, ut de locis sacris vel de locis religiosis. de rebus hominum interdicta redduntur aut de his, quae sunt alicuius, aut de his, quae nullius sunt. quae sunt nullius, haec sunt: liberae personae, de quibus exhibendis ducendis interdicta competunt. quae sunt alicuius, haec sunt aut publica aut singulorum. publica: de locis publicis, de viis deque fluminibus publicis. quae autem singulorum sunt, aut ad universitatem pertinent, ut interdictum quorum bonorum, aut ad singulas res, ut est interdictum uti possidetis, de itinere actuque. 1Interdictorum autem tres species sunt, exhibitoria prohibitoria restitutoria: sunt tamen quaedam interdicta et mixta, quae et prohibitoria sunt et exhibitoria. 2Interdictorum quaedam in praesens, quaedam in praeteritum referuntur: in praesens, ut uti possidetis: in praeteritum, ut de itinere actuque, de aqua aestiva. 3Interdicta omnia licet in rem videantur concepta, vi tamen ipsa personalia sunt. 4Interdictorum quaedam annalia sunt, quaedam perpetua.
1 Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book LXVII. Let us see in what cases interdicts are available. It should be noted that they are applicable to both Divine or human affairs; to Divine affairs, where sacred or religious places are concerned. Interdicts are granted with reference to human affairs, where property has an 6wner, or where it belongs to no one. Free persons are included in that which belongs to no one, and interdicts will lie where they must be produced in court, or conducted anywhere. Things which have an owner are the property of the public, or of individuals. Public property consists of public places, highways, and rivers; property belonging to individuals is such as relates to property in its entirety, as in the case of an interdict Quorum, bonorum, and that which is separated, as in the case of the interdict Uti possidetis or De itinere actuque. 1There are three kinds of interdicts, exhibitory, prohibitory, and restitutory. There are also certain interdicts which are of a mixed nature, and which are both prohibitory and exhibitory. 2Some interdicts have reference to the present time, and others to future time. The interdict Uti possidetis has reference to the present time, and the one De itinere actuque de aqua sestiva has reference to future time. 3All interdicts are personal in their application, although they appear to relate to property. 4Some interdicts only last a year, and others are perpetual.
2 Paulus libro sexagensimo tertio ad edictum. Interdictorum quaedam duplicia sunt, quaedam simplicia. duplicia dicuntur, ut uti possidetis, simplicia sunt ea, veluti exhibitoria et restitutoria, item prohibitoria de arboribus caedendis et de itinere actuque. 1Interdicta autem competunt vel hominum causa vel divini iuris aut de religione, sicut est ‘ne quid in loco sacro fiat’ vel ‘quod factum est restituatur’ et de mortuo inferendo vel sepulchro aedificando. hominum causa competunt vel ad publicam utilitatem pertinentia vel sui iuris tuendi causa vel officii tuendi causa vel rei familiaris. publicae utilitatis causa competit interdictum ‘ut via publica uti liceat’ et ‘flumine publico’ et ‘ne quid fiat in via publica’: iuris sui tuendi causa de liberis exhibendis, item de liberto exhibendo: officii causa de homine libero exhibendo: reliqua interdicta rei familiaris causa dantur. 2Quaedam interdicta rei persecutionem continent, veluti de itinere actuque privato: nam proprietatis causam continet hoc interdictum. sed et illa interdicta, quae de locis sacris et de religiosis proponuntur, veluti proprietatis causam continent, item illa de liberis exhibendis, quae iuris tuendi causa diximus competere, ut non sit mirum, si, quae interdicta ad rem familiarem pertinent, proprietatis, non possessionis causam habeant. 3Haec autem interdicta, quae ad rem familiarem spectant, aut apiscendae sunt possessionis aut reciperandae aut retinendae. apiscendae possessionis sunt interdicta, quae competunt his, qui ante non sunt nancti possessionem. sunt autem interdicta apiscendae possessionis ‘quorum bonorum’: Salvianum quoque interdictum, quod est de pignoribus, ex hoc genere est: et ‘quo itinere venditor usus est, quo minus emptor utatur, vim fieri veto’. reciperandae possessionis causa proponuntur sub rubrica unde vi: aliqua enim sub hoc titulo interdicta sunt. retinendae possessionis sunt interdicta uti possidetis. sunt interdicta ut diximus, duplicia tam reciperandae quam apiscendae possessionis.
2 Paulus, On the Edict, Book LXIII. There are double and single interdicts. The interdict Uti possidetis is an instance of a double one. Exhibitory and restitutory interdicts are single, and there are also prohibitory interdicts, as for instance, those De arboribus cædendis and De itinere actuque. 1Moreover, interdicts will lie in favor either of persons, or for the purpose of upholding the Divine Law, and protecting places which are religious; for example, to prevent any act being committed in a sacred place, or to compel matters to be restored to their former condition, where anything has been done; which includes the interdict having reference to burials and the construction of tombs. Those which have been established in favor of persons either have reference to the common welfare, the maintenance of the rights of individuals, the discharge of official duty, or the preservation of private property. The interdict granting the use of public highways and public rivers, and prohibiting any obstruction from being placed upon a highway is an instance of one instituted for the common welfare; the interdicts to compel the production of children and freedmen in court are examples of those established for the protection of private rights. The interdict requiring the production of a freeman in court is an example of one to compel the performance of an official duty. Other interdicts are granted for the protection of property. 2Some interdicts include the pursuit of property, as, for instance, the one which has reference to private rights of way, for by proceedings under this interdict the title to property is involved. Interdicts which refer to sacred and religious places also embrace, to a certain extent, the title to property. That which has reference to the production of children in court, and which we have stated has for its object the maintenance of private rights, is also of this description, so that it is not strange that interdicts relating to private property include the title to it and not the right to its mere possession. 3Those interdicts which have reference to private property are instituted either for the purpose of acquiring, recovering, or retaining possession. Interdicts to obtain possession are such as are available by parties who have not hitherto acquired it; and an example of these is the interdict Quorum bonorum. The Salvian Edict which relates to pledges is one of this kind, and is as follows: “I forbid violence to be employed to prevent the purchaser from using a right of way which was used by the vendor.” Interdicts for the recovery of possession are mentioned under the title, “Unde vi,” for there are certain interdicts which are classed under this head. The interdict, “Uti possidetis,” is an instance of one of those issued for the purpose of retaining possession. As we have previously stated there are also interdicts which are double; these are for the purpose of both recovering and retaining possession.
3 Ulpianus libro sexagensimo nono ad edictum. In interdictis exinde ratio habetur fructuum, ex quo edita sunt, non retro.
3 Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book LXIX. In interdicts issued to compel the return of crops, the date when they were issued is taken into consideration, and not any previous time.
4 Paulus libro sexagensimo septimo ad edictum. Ex quibus causis annua interdicta sunt, ex his de eo, quod ad eum cum quo agitur pervenit, post annum iudicium dandum Sabinus respondit.
4 Paulus, On the Edict, Book LXVII. In cases where the interdicts are only in force for a year, Sabinus is of the opinion that an action should be granted after the year has elapsed, if the party who is sued has obtained any of said crops.
5 Idem libro tertio decimo ad Sabinum. Interdicta noxalia ea sunt, quae ob delictum eorum, quos in potestate habemus, dantur, veluti cum vi deiecerunt aut vi aut clam opus fecerunt. sed officio iudicis continetur, ut dominum sua inpensa opus restituentem absolvat: patientiam tollendo operi praestantem noxae dedere iubeat et absolvat, si non dedat, quantum impensae in tollendo opere erogatum sit, tanti condemnet: si neque patientiam praestet neque ipse tollat, cum possit, in tantum condemnet, in quantum iudex aestimaverit, atque si ipse fecisset.
5 The Same, On Sabinus, Book XIII. Noxal interdicts are those which are granted on account of some crime committed by persons under our control; as, for instance, where they have forcibly ejected anyone, or have erected a new work either by violence, or clandestinely. It is, however, the duty of the judge to release the owner, if he places the property in its former condition at his own expense; or if he permits the work to be removed, and directs a slave to be surrendered by way of reparation. If he does not surrender the slave, judgment must be rendered against him for the amount of expense incurred in removing the work; and if he neither suffers it to be removed, nor removes it himself, if he can do so, he shall have judgment rendered against him for an amount which the court may determine, just as if he himself has constructed the work in question.