Page 178 - Latent Defect or Excessive Price?Exploring Early Modern Legal Approach to Remedying Defects in Goods Exchanged for Money - Bruijn

LEGAL HUMANISM
opted for, if the shorter remedy has died. According to Dumoulin, when two similar remedies concur, the shortest limitation period applies.82
Wesenbeck, however, does not subscribe to the reasoning of his master Mudaeus. Referring to the two variants of the remedy for price reduction, he simply reiterates Accursius' distinction. 'The first is of civil, the second of praetorian law. The first is perpetual, the second annual, see D. 21.1.6 and 21.1.38'.83 No trace can be found of Mudaeus' sophisticated argument for discarding the 30-year period in favour of the aedilician one-year period for bringing the remedy for price reduction. Wesenbeck's contemporary Ludolf Schrader (1531-1589)84 also adheres to the medieval doctrine and leaves the divergent limitation periods intact.85
Neither did Cujas dismiss the medieval distinction. In his treatment of the remedy for returning the thing he upholds the view that the civil variant lasts for 30 years, whereas the aedilician remedy lapses after six months.86 Yet, Cujas does not pass over the question without adding a few words about the idea underlying this difference. Considering that he regarded the aedilician remedies as provisions which bear a penal character and are supplementary to the remedies available under the actio empti. It is because of their penal character that a different limitation period is justified.
'The most important difference between these remedies is that the aedilician remedies appear to be penal, see D. 21.1.23.4, since they amount to the double, if the judge does not find otherwise (after all they are arbitrary actions). As such they entail a penalty, see D. 21.1.45. For that reason, they are temporal remedies, whereas the remedies on the sales contract are perpetual, i.e., 30 years, see C. 8.44.21pr.'87
Finally, Giphanius, who so despised the medieval glossographi, nonetheless accepts the distinction made by the glossator Accursius between perpetual civil and
82 Molinaeus, De aedilitiis actionibus, 3.1-4, p. 217-218: 'Actio quanto minoris est duplex. Praetoria, quae datur propter morbum, l. quod si nolit, § si plures, in fin., ff. eod. \[D. 21.1.31.5\]. Civilis, quae datur propter alium defectum, l. Iulianus, in princ., ff. de actionibus empt. \[D. 19.1.13pr.\]'. Haec actio annalis est, l. aediles aiunt, in princ., ff. eo. \[D. 21.1.38pr\]. \[4\] Et propterea videbatur dubitabile dictum Bald, in l. si praedium, C. de aedil. act. no. 9 \[Baldus, Commentaria, vol. 1, to C. 4.58.2, no. 9 (actually, Baldus makes his assertion in no. 8), fo. 132\] ubi concludit quod quando competunt duo auxilia, quorum unum est breve, alterum minoris spatii, si denegatur breve, potest aliud locum habere, l. si tamen, § non nocebit, ff. eo \[D. 21.1.48.2\] nec dicitur electum, quod est praescriptione absorptum'.
83 Wesenbecius, In pandectas, to D. 21.1, no. 20, p. 237: 'Nam illa civilis, haec praetorii iuris est:...Illa perpetua est, haec annalis, d. l. sciendum, § fin., d.l. de aedil. \[D. 21.1.19.6\]'.
84 For biographical data see P. Zimmermann, 'Schrader, Ludolf', in: ADB 32 (1891), p. 433-434.
85 Schrader, Commentarius, ch. 25, nos. 107-108, p. 362: ´Civilis actio quanti minoris illa dicitur, quae perpetua datur emptori contra venditorem ignorantem...Actio vero quanti minoris praetoria illa dicitur, qua
emptor rei animatae contra venditorem intra annum experitur...'.
86 Cuiacius, Opera omnia, vol. 2, to C. 4.58, p. 293 C: 'Actiones empti et venditi aut civilis sunt... aut
aediliciae... Alia est actio redhibitoria civilis, de qua initio l. pen. \[C. 4.58.4?\] haec est perpetua, aedilicia temporalis'; Cf. Cuiacius, Opera omnia, vol. 1, to D. 21.1, p. 778 E-779 A: 'Item aedilitiae temporariae sunt, veluti redhibitoria semestris, aestimatoria annalis, exceptis casibus certis... Civiles perpetua sunt...' .
87 Cuiacius, Opera, vol. 9, p. 396 C: 'Praecipua differentia inter eas actiones est, quod aedilitiae videntur esse poenales, d.l. 23. § si servus, hoc tit. Quia nisi pareatur arbitrio iudicis (sunt enim arbitrariae) crescunt in duplum, l. 45. eodem tit. et ita poenam continent, et ob id sunt temporales actiones: empti vero actiones sunt perpetuae, id est, 30. annor. l. empti, inf., de evict'.
168