Search results for "innominate contracts"
showing 3 items of 3 documents
Giuliano e i nova negotia: sulla tutela dei c.d. contratti innominati tra l’età traianea e l’età dei Severi
2021
The study deals with Julian's thought on the protection of innominate contracts. In this regard, the idea is widespread that the jurist was opposed to an enlargement of the contractual sphere beyond the figures recognized at the edictal level. This conviction is based primarily on Ulp. 4 ad ed. D. 2.14.7.2, well-known testimony in which Julian is reprimanded by Maurician and Ulpian for having granted an action in factum about a case of eviction, for which, according to both jurists his successors, he could have acted with the actio civilis incerti. The study disputes this idea and comes to the conclusion rather than to determine Julian’s solution of Ulp. 4 ad ed. it was a functional (or eco…
Brevi considerazioni su Paul. 32 ad ed. D.19.4.1.4: tra tradizione testuale e proposte emendative
2012
This paper analyses a famous excerpt from the roman jurist Paulus on the barter (Paul. 32 ad ed. D.19.4.1.4). According to the scholars this passage lists (even if confusedly) the available procedural remedies against the defaulting party, given the institution of a valid contract: action in id quod interest, aimed at obtaining a specific performance, and the condictio quasi re non secuta, for the recovery of what has already been given. However, this reconstruction does not consider the connection (igitur) with the previous § 3, in which it is affirmed that barter is void when a party delivers a third party property. So the author suggests to abandon Mommsen’s reconstruction based on Bas.2…
Paul. 32 ad ed. D.19.4.1.1: permuta ed evizione in un noto testo paolino
2012
The present work deals with D.19.4.1.1, text in which Paul seems to grant an actio in factum pretoria (Gai 4.66) in favour of the contractor evicted within a relationship of barter, with a solution that not generally seemed consistent with the decision taken elsewhere by the same jurist (Paul. D. 19.5.5.1) to allow a civil action for the hypothesis of non-execution. Many have therefore assumed that Paul was referring someone else's opinion (maybe by Salvio Giuliano) from him not shared, with a proposal though hardly sustainable. Part of the doctrine has so explained the different solution of D.19.4.1.1 with the hypothesis of a failure to improve the contractual situation due to the invalidi…