Page 332 - Latent Defect or Excessive Price?Exploring Early Modern Legal Approach to Remedying Defects in Goods Exchanged for Money - Bruijn
P. 332

SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURY NATURAL LAW
bona fide contracts241, which presents a serious advantage over the aedilician remedies.242 The debated point what kind of dolus lesion beyond moiety in itself constitutes is passed over by the majority of usus modernus-scholars without much ado. They attach similar consequences to lesion beyond moiety as to dolus ex proposito.243 The just price has to be determined either by experts, judges or witnesses, which implies an objective standard in the sense that a third party assesses the thing's just price.244
On the other hand, notably French legal scholars inspired by customary law, such as Domat, are of the opinion that the remedy had to be limited to sellers. Pothier, though he also grants the remedy to buyers, exclusively limits it's applicability to sale of immovables, something we will see working through in the Code civil of 1804 in the next chapter.245 The same goes for the remedy's applicability to immovables or inheritances only.246 Pothier fixes the remedy's duration on 10 years, which period would be reduced to two in the Code civil.247 Routier († 1749) holds 30 years.248 He further adds that in Normandy the remedy for lesion beyond moiety was only possible in sales of
241 Lauterbach, Collegium, vol. 1, to D. 18.5, no. 60, p. 1298:'Praescribitur haec querela J. communi 30 annis, arg. l. 3 & 4, C. de 30 annor. praescript. \[C. 7.39.3-4.\]..'. Lauterbach abundantly refers to other scholars; Berger, Oeconomia, 3.5.18, nota 4, p. 671; Titius, Iuris privati, 4.20.23, p. 568; Schulze, Die Laesio, p. 43-44.
242 Hilbert, Dissertatio juridica, § 22, pp. 19-20: '...non dubitamus quin lex nostra quoque locum inveniat in locatione conductione'; Kreittmayer, Anmerkungen, vol. 4, no. 7, p. 217; Schulze, Die Laesio, p. 35, 55, 79.
243 Winckler (1597-1648), De emptione venditione, th. IX: 'Dolus in tot iure exosus, contractibus bonae fidei maxime adversatur, irritamque facit emptionem-venditionem, etiamsi deceptio sit infra dimidium iusti pretii et ipsum preterea decipientem obligat ad interesse decepto praestandum'; Carpzov, Jurisprudentia, const. 34, p. 720; Leyser (1683-1752), Meditationes, vol. 3, p. 574ff: 'Tunc etiam propter laesionem infra dimidium rescinditur venditio, quum dolus concurrit'; Queisen, Disputatio juridica, 2.10, pp. 19-20: 'Ut vero remedio huic ob enormem laesionem in pretio locus sit, dolus laedentis non requiritur, nam si dolus alterutrius intervenit, quaelibet laesio ad rescissionem sufficit, l. 5, C. de rescind. vendit. \[C. 4.44.5\]'. Hence, as to its effects, a prejudice of more than half the thing's just price must be considered dolus.
244 Winckler, De emptione-venditione, th. 11: 'non rescinditur contractus, nisi deceptio sit ultra dimidium, quod arbitrio boni viri aestimandum...'; Lauterbach, Collegium, vol. 1, to D. 18.5, no. 12, p. 920: 'Laesio vero enormissima judicis arbitrio determinatur'; idem, no. 13, p. 920: 'In computanda hac enormi laesione respiciendum est non ad singularem unius affectionem, sed ad communem rerum aestimationem...'; Stryk, Usus modernus, vol. 3, to D. 18.5, § 15, p. 438; Titius, Iuris privati, 4.20.17, p. 566: '...respiciendum est ad commune rerum pretium...´; Queisen, Disputatio, 2.10, pp. 19-20: 'Ut itaque probetur verum rei pretium, plerique id non per testes fieri posse ajunt, sed per probos peritosque aestimatores, ita Sandius, lib. III, tit. 4'; Kreittmayer, Anmerkungen, vol. 4, 4.3, §§ 4-8, no. 8, p. 172: 'Ob nun zwar wohl die Schätzung durch Schätzleute die gemeinste und üblichste ist... so sind doch dadurch andere Probsmittel, um auf den wahren Werth zu kommen, nicht ausgeschlossen, sonder es kann die diesfallig nöthige Probe auch per Testes geschehen'..
245 Pothier, Vente, vol. 1, no. 334, p. 327.
246 Pothier, Vente, vol. 1, nos. 339, 375, pp. 368; idem, Obligations, vol. 1, 1.3.4, p. 50: 'La raison de ce droit
peut être que nos peres faisoient consister la richesse dans les biens-fonds, et faisoient peu de cas des meubles: de-là vient que dans la plupart des matieres de notre Droit François, les meubles sont peu considérés... ce commerce seroit troublé, si on admettoit la restitution pour cause de lésion à l'égard des meubles'. .
247 Pothier, Vente, nos. 347, 373, pp. 341, 366: '\[np. 347\] comme celui de toutes les actions rescisoires pour lesquelles il faut prendre des lettres en chancellerie'; \[no. 373\]: 'En conséquence elle ne peut s'intenter qu'en vertu des Lettres de rescision obtenues en la Chancellerie du Palais, par lesquelles le Prince ordonne la rescision du contrat, si'il appert au Juge de la lésion exposée par l'acheteur.'
248 Routier, Principes géneraux, 7.1.7, p. 340.
 326






















































































   330   331   332   333   334