Corpus iurisprudentiae Romanae

Repertorium zu den Quellen des römischen Rechts
Dig. XLIX8,
Quae sententiae sine appellatione rescindantur
Liber quadragesimus nonus
VIII.

Quae sententiae sine appellatione rescindantur

(What Decisions Can be Rescinded Without an Appeal.)

1 Macer libro secundo de appellationibus. Illud meminerimus: si quaeratur, iudicatum sit nec ne, et huius quaestionis iudex non esse iudicatum pronuntiaverit: licet fuerit iudicatum, rescinditur, si provocatum non fuerit. 1Item si calculi error in sententia esse dicatur, appellare necesse non est: veluti si iudex ita pronuntiaverit: ‘Cum constet Titium Seio ex illa specie quinquaginta, item ex illa specie viginti quinque debere, idcirco Lucium Titium Seio centum condemno’: nam quoniam error computationis est, nec appellare necesse est et citra provocationem corrigitur. sed et si huius quaestionis iudex sententiam centum confirmaverit, si quidem ideo, quod quinquaginta et viginti quinque fieri centum putaverit, adhuc idem error computationis est nec appellare necesse est: si vero ideo, quoniam et alias species viginti quinque fuisse dixerit, appellationi locus est. 2Item cum contra sacras constitutiones iudicatur, appellationis necessitas remittitur. contra constitutiones autem iudicatur, cum de iure constitutionis, non de iure litigatoris pronuntiatur. nam si iudex volenti se ex cura muneris vel tutelae beneficio liberorum vel aetatis aut privilegii excusare, dixerit neque filios neque aetatem aut ullum privilegium ad muneris vel tutelae excusationem prodesse, de iure constituto pronuntiasse intellegitur: quod si de iure suo probantem admiserit, sed idcirco contra eum sententiam dixerit, quod negaverit eum de aetate sua aut de numero liberorum probasse, de iure litigatoris pronuntiasse intellegitur: quo casu appellatio necessaria est. 3Item cum ex edicto peremptorio, quod neque propositum est neque in notitiam pervenit absentis, condemnatio fit, nullius momenti esse sententiam constitutiones demonstrant. 4Si apud eundem iudicem invicem petamus, si et mea et tua petitio sine usuris fuit et iudex me priorem tibi condemnavit, quo magis tu prior me condemnatum habeas: non est mihi necesse pro hac causa appellare, quando secundum sacras constitutiones iudicatum a me petere non possis, priusquam de mea quoque petitione iudicetur. sed magis est, ut appellatio interponatur.

1 Macer, On Appeals, Book II. We must remember that when an inquiry is made whether a case has been decided or not, and the judge of this question declares that it has not been decided, even though it may have been, it is rescinded, even if no appeal has been taken. 1Likewise, if an error in the calculation is alleged to exist in the decision, it is not necessary to appeal, for instance, if the judge decides as follows: “As it is proved that Titius owes Seius fifty sesterces for such-and-such an article, and also twenty-five for another; therefore I hold that Lucius Titius shall pay Seius a hundred sesterces;” because, as the mistake is one of computation, it is not necessary to appeal, and it can be corrected without doing so. If, however, the judge of this question should render a decision for a hundred sesterces, for the reason that he thought that fifty and twenty-five made a hundred, still, the same mistake is one of computation, and it is not necessary to appeal. But when the judge decides that there is another sum of twenty-five sesterces due, there will be ground for appeal. 2Likewise, when the decision is contrary to the Imperial Constitutions, the necessity for appeal does not exist. A decision is rendered against the constitutions when it is pronounced in compliance with the law as laid down by them, and not with reference to the rights of the litigant; for if the judge, in the case of a person desiring to be excused from the charge of a public office, or of a guardianship, on account of having children, or through age, or by reason of some privilege, should hold that neither children, nor age, nor any privilege will avail to excuse anyone from office, or from guardianship, he is understood to have decided with reference to the law as set forth in the constitutions. If, however, he should permit a person to establish his right, and then renders a decision against him because he did not prove his age, or the number of his children; he is understood to have decided with reference to the rights of the litigant, in which case an appeal will be necessary. 3Likewise when, under a peremptory Edict which has not been published, and of which the party has not been notified, he is convicted while absent, the constitutions declare that a decision of this kind is of no effect. 4If you and I both apply to the same judge, and neither of our petitions asks for interest, and the judge renders a decision against me before doing so against you, in order that you may be the first to have a judgment in your favor; it is not necessary for me to appeal on this ground, as, according to the Sacred Constitutions, you cannot ask for an execution against me before judgment has been rendered with reference to my claim; but the better opinion is that an appeal should be taken.

2 Paulus libro tertio responsorum. Paulus respondit eum, qui in rebus humanis non fuit sententiae dictae tempore, inefficaciter condemnatum videri. 1Idem respondit adversus eum, qui in rebus humanis non esset, cum iudex datus est, neque iudicis dationem valuisse neque sententiam adversus eum dictam vires habere.

2 Paulus, Opinions, Book III. Paulus held that he who was not alive at the time when judgment was rendered against him is understood to have been condemned to no purpose. 1He also held with reference to a person who was not alive at the time when the judge was appointed to decide his case that the appointment of the judge was void, and any decision rendered against him would be of no force or effect.

3 Idem libro sexto decimo responsorum. Paulus respondit inpossibile praeceptum iudicis nullius esse momenti. 1Idem respondit ab ea sententia, cui pareri rerum natura non potuit, sine causa appellari.

3 The Same, Opinions, Book XVI. Paulus gave it as his opinion that a judicial order which is impossible was void. 1He also gave it as his opinion, that there was no ground for appeal where a decision had been rendered, which, in the nature of things, could not be complied with.