‘PERICULUM VERBUM GENERALE EST’: RISK ALLOCATION IN THE COMMENTARIES OF JACQUES CUJAS

Stanisław  Kordasiewicz

doi:10.21697/zp.2021.21.4.12

Opublikowane: 2021-12-26

Tom 21 Nr 4 (2021)

‘PERICULUM VERBUM GENERALE EST’: RISK ALLOCATION IN THE COMMENTARIES OF JACQUES CUJAS

Stanisław Kordasiewicz

Zeszyty Prawnicze

Dział: Artykuły

https://doi.org/10.21697/zp.2021.21.4.12

Abstrakt

Jacques Cujas was a French humanist and one of the most distinguished 16th-century legal experts. This paper analyses the rules governing liability and the meaning of periculum (risk) in his commentaries to Roman law.

My study is focused on two examples which oﬀer surprising interpretations of risk. The first case concerns a person who lost an object given for valuation. Here Cujas uses the term periculum in two diﬀerent meanings. The first is general and covers all types of irresistible events. The second is limited to only one type of event – theft. This distinction is fundamental for the evaluation of the legal consequences arising from the loss of the object. Te inspector would have had to bear the risk of theft (periculum furti), but not other risks, especially not those related to force majeure.

The second case I discuss deals with the complexities of risk allocation in the contract of sale. In one of his earlier commentaries, Cujas accepted the Roman legal principle of periculum emptoris – that the risk of the loss of the object sold should be on the buyer. At the same time, in his discussion of particular cases Cujas was ﬂexible in allocating various risks to either of the parties, thus paving the way for his future change of mind on periculum venditoris.

Pobierz pliki

PDF (English)

Zasady cytowania

Kordasiewicz, S. . (2021). ‘PERICULUM VERBUM GENERALE EST’: RISK ALLOCATION IN THE COMMENTARIES OF JACQUES CUJAS. Zeszyty Prawnicze, 21(4), 293–331. https://doi.org/10.21697/zp.2021.21.4.12

Cited by / Share

Bibliografia

Bauer M., Periculum emptoris: eine dogmengeschichtliche Untersuchung zur Gefahrtragung beim Kauf, Berlin 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3790/978-3-428-49496-5
Google Scholar

Cannata C.A., Ricerche sulla responsabilità contrattuale nel diritto o I, Milano 1966.
Google Scholar

Carbone M., «Hac lege…venire oportet». Alcuni riﬂessioni sui formulari di vendita in Catone, «Rivista di Diritto Romano», XvI-XvII/2016-2017, https:// www.ledonline.it/rivistadirittoromano/allegati/dirittoromano16-17-Carbone-HacLege.pdf.
Google Scholar

Cardilli R., L’obbligazione di <> e la responsabilità contrattuale in diritto romano, Milano 1995.
Google Scholar

Chartier J-L., Cujas, l’oracle du droit et de la jurisprudence, Paris 2016.
Google Scholar

Corbino A., La risalenza dell’emptio-venditio consensuale e i suoi rapporti con la mancipatio, «IURA» LXIV/2016, pp. 9-100.
Google Scholar

Cujas J., In Lib. VIII Quest. Papin, [in:] Opera omnia: vol. IV, c. 161 (https://reader.digitale-sammlungen.de/de/fs1/object/display/bsb10494306_00093.html). All texts of Cujas are from the reference edition of Charles-Annibal Fabrot,
Google Scholar

Cujas, Jacques, Opera omnia. venice-Modena 1758–1783. This edition is also easily consulted under: https://opacplus.bsb-muenchen.de/title/Bv035547117.
Google Scholar

Cujas J., Ad Africanum Tractatus VIII, [in:] Opera Omnia, vol. 1., c. 1294, (https://reader.digitale-sammlungen.de/de/fs1/object/display/bsb10494303_00698.html).
Google Scholar

Cujas J., In Liv. IV. Codicis, [in:] Opera omnia, vol. 9, c. 349-351 (https://reader.
Google Scholar

digitale-sammlungen.de/de/fs1/object/display/bsb10494311_00179.html).
Google Scholar

de Bruijn N., ‘No one is a better jurist than Accursius’. Medieval Legal Scholarship as the Fountainhead of Inspiration for Jacques Cujas and Hugues Doneau?, «Tijdschrif voor Rechtsgeschiedenis», 82(1-2)/2014, pp. 72-99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718190-08212p07
Google Scholar

de Robertis F.M., La responsabilità contrattuale nel diritto romano, Bari 1994.
Google Scholar

Dilcher H., Die Teorie der Leistungsstörungen bei Glossatoren, Kommentatoren und Kanonisten, Frankfurt am Main 1960.
Google Scholar

Ernst W., Neues zur Gefahrtragung bei emptio venditio und locatio conductio?, «ZSS» 121/2004, p. 363-378. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7767/zrgra.2004.121.1.363
Google Scholar

Ernst W., Periculum est emptoris, «ZSS» 99/1982, pp. 216-248; https://doi. org/10.7767/zrgra.2004.121.1.363. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7767/zrgra.1982.99.1.216
Google Scholar

Hoffman H-J., Die Abstufung der Fahrlässigkeit in der Rechtsgeschichte: Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der culpa levissima, Berlin 1968. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111531151
Google Scholar

[Jakab E., Risikomanagement beim Weinkauf: Periculum und Praxis im Imperium Romanum. München 2009, doi:10.4000/books.chbeck.1154, (https://books. openedition.org/chbeck/1154). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/books.chbeck.1146
Google Scholar

Jakab E., W. Ernst (eds.), Kaufen nach Römischem Recht, Berlin/Heidelberg 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71193-3
Google Scholar

Jansen N., Die Struktur des Hafungsrechts: Geschichte, Teorie und Dogmatik außervertraglicher Ansprüche auf Schadensersatz, Tübingen 2003.
Google Scholar

Kaser M., Die ‘actio furti’ des Verkäufers, «ZSS» 96/1979, pp. 89-128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7767/zrgra.1979.96.1.89
Google Scholar

Kaser M., Das römische Privatrecht I 2, München 1971.
Google Scholar

Kordasiewicz S., Odpowiedzialność kontraktowa w pismach Cuiaciusa – wybrane zagadnienia, «Czasopismo Prawno-Historyczne» 72(1)/2020, pp. 137-157. Text available at: https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cph/article/view/24089/22466. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/cph.2020.1.8
Google Scholar

Maccormack G., Custodia and Culpa, «ZSS» 89/1972, pp. 149-219; https://doi.org/10.7767/zrgra.1972.89.1.149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7767/zrgra.1972.89.1.149
Google Scholar

Maganzani L., La “diligentia quam suis” del depositario dal diritto romano alle codifcazioni nazionali: Casi e questioni di diritto civile nella prospettiva storico-comparatistica, LED Online 2006, https://www.ledonline.it/rivistadirittoromano/index.html?/rivistadirittoromano/maganzanidiligentia.html.
Google Scholar

Pennitz M., Das Periculim rei venditae. Ein Beitrag zum “actionenrechtlichen Denken” im römischen Privatrecht, Wien 2000, pp. 380-408.
Google Scholar

Pichonnaz P., Periculum emptoris und das schweizerische Recht: Ein Fall des Rückgriﬀs auf römisches Recht durch das Schweizerische Bundesgericht [in:] Kaufen nach Römischem Recht, eds. E. Jakab, W. Ernst, Berlin/Heidelberg 2008 doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-71193-3, pp. 183-201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71193-3_9
Google Scholar

Prévost X., Jacques Cujas (1522-1590). Jurisconsulte humaniste, Genève 2015.
Google Scholar

Idem, Reassessing the Inﬂuence of Medieval Jurisprudence on Jacques Cujas’ (1522–1590) Method, [in:] Reassessing Legal Humanism and its Claims: Petere Fontes?, eds. P. Du Plessis & J. Cairns, Edinburgh 2015, pp. 88-107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474408851.003.0005
Google Scholar

Idem, Jacques Cujas: (1522–1590), [in:] Great Christian Jurists in French History, eds. O. Descamps & R. Domingo, Cambridge 2019, pp. 134-148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108669979.009
Google Scholar

Idem, Between Practice and Teory: Succession Law According to Jacques Cujas (1522–1590) [in:] Succession Law, Practice and Society in Europe across the Centuries. Studies in the History of Law and Justice 14, ed. di Renzo Villata M., Cham 2018, pp. 359-379. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76258-6_12
Google Scholar

Idem, Observationum et emendationum libri XXVIII (Twenty-eight Books of Observations and Emendations) 1556-1595 [in:] The Formation and Transmission of Western Legal Culture 150 Books that Made the Law in the Age of Printing, eds. S. Dauchy, G. Martyn, A. Musson, H. Pihlajamäki, A. Wijffels, Cham
Google Scholar

, pp. 110-113.
Google Scholar

Shermeier M.J., § 326. Gefahrenverteilung im gegenseitigen Vertrag [in:] Historisch-kritischer Kommentar zum BGB, II. Schuldrecht: Algemeiner Teil 2. Teilband §§ 305-432, ed. M. Schmockel, J. Rückert, R. Zimmermann, Tübingen 2007, pp. 1900-1912.
Google Scholar

Święcicka P., Prawo rzymskie w okresie Renesansu i Baroku. Humanistyczny wymiar europejskiej kultury prawnej, «Czasopismo Prawno-Historyczne» 64(1)/2012, p. 35 n.131. Text available at: https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cph/article/view/15291. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/cph.2012.64.1.01
Google Scholar

Talamanca M., Considerazioni sul ‘periculum rei venditae’, «Seminarios Complutense de Derecho Romano» 7/1995, pp. 217-296.
Google Scholar

Thielmann G., ‘Traditio’ und Gefahrübergang, «ZSS» 106/1989, pp. 292-326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7767/zrgra.1989.106.1.292
Google Scholar

Vacca L., Considerazioni in tema di risoluzione del contratto per impossibilità della prestazione e di ripartizione del rischio nella ‘locatio conductio’, [in:] Iuris Vincula, Studi in onore di Mario Talamanca VII, Napoli 2001.
Google Scholar

Watson A., The Digest of Justinian, Philadelphia 1998.
Google Scholar

Yaron R., Remarks on Consensual Sale (with special attention to ‘periculum emptoris’), «Roman Legal Tradition» 59/2004, (https://romanlegaltradition.org/contents/2004/RLT-YARON1.PDF).
Google Scholar