Page 179 - Latent Defect or Excessive Price?Exploring Early Modern Legal Approach to Remedying Defects in Goods Exchanged for Money - Bruijn

CHAPTER FOUR
temporal aedilician remedies for latent defects.88
Cujas' great rival Doneau, on the other hand, denies that the limitation periods of aedilician and civil remedies differ. His main argument against that view is one already encountered in Mudaeus' writings. It is again based on the puzzling rescript of emperor Gordian in which the plaintiff is put in his place by an emperor who explains that it is crystal clear for all to see that what he requested is impossible.89 Though Doneau was not the first humanist who interpreted the rescript in this manner, he provides the most extensive treatment of the matter.90 As his account gives a good insight into how early modern humanists framed their thoughts, it is quoted here at length.
'Without doubt he \[the emperor\] wished that there would be no possibility whatsoever, neither in civil nor praetorian law, to start proceedings on the grounds put forward. After all, the legal dispute was not about whether the aedilician action applied, but about whether it was possible to start proceedings at all, which the emperor denied. From that it can be gathered that there is no perpetual civil remedy on the sales contract, which, if there was one, would have worked after one year. Therefore, what Bartolus said is ridiculous, vid. that an aedilician remedy for price reduction must be accepted, because the rescript is placed under the header 'On the aedilician remedies'. As if Gordian's91 verdict would change because of the fact that Tribonian later put the rescript under that heading!'.92
The only thing the emperor said was that there is no longer a remedy available, neither civil, nor praetorian after one year had passed. Doneau continues his explanation and relates the rescript to D. 19.1.13pr. in which the civil remedy for price reduction is discussed. Doneau still had to deal with the doctrine that hung up the existence of two
88 Giphanius, Disputatio, th. 104, p. 30: 'Verum aediliciae actiones redhibitoria et aestimatoria... cum hac ex empto confundi non debent, quae est civilis, perpetua, rei persecutoria et bonae fidei, ut sup. dict. Cum illae sint honorariae, temporales, poenales et arbitrariae'.
89 See for the complete Digest text and a translation section 2.2.1.3. That Doneau took his cue from this constitution is also noted by Vecchi, ‘La garanzia nella vendita in diritto commune’, p. 94.
90 Sichardus, a friend of Zasius, mentions that although theoretically there might exist two limitation periods, legal practicioners, in keeping with the views of medieval scholars Cynus and De Belleperche, ignore the long lasting civil remedy. Sichardus nevertheless advises to follow the ius commune majority view which allows for a perpetual civil remedy. See his Dictata, to. C. 4.58, no. 12, p. 477: 'Et illa actio civilis duraretur perpetuo, quae practica plane ignoratur hodie in foro, quamvis ex communi sententia doctorum probetur. Tamen si mihi de iure statuendum esset, crederem tantummodo unam esse quanto minoris actionem et eam esse praetoriam, quod et Cyn. et Petr. sequuntur in l. 2 infra eod. moti per text. qui dicit \[quotes C. 4.58.2\].... Nam si alia fuisset civili quanto minoris actio ut doctores communiter tenent: tunc Imp. supplicanti de ea respondisset: tamen in iudicando et in consulendo sequerer communem opinionem et permitterem actionem civilem quanto minoris'.
91 Gordian III, Emperor of the Roman Empire from 238 to 244.
92 Donellus, In titulum, to D. 21.1, pp. 306–307: 'Nimirum hoc voluit, nullo modo agi posse eo nomine nec
iure civile nec aedilitio. Non enim hoc agebatur, an aedilitia aliqua actio competeret, sed an aliquo modo posset agi iure. Quid ille negavit. Ex quo colligetur, nullam esse civilem ex empto perpetuam: quae si esset, actio aliqua post anno competeret. Ridiculum est enim, quod Bartolus ait, cum illud Gordiani rescriptum situm sit sub titulo de aedilitiis actionibus, accipiendum quoque esset de aedilitia, quanto minoris actione. Quasi vero quia sub titulum de aedilitiis actionibus a Triboniano postea relatum est, efficere possit, ut sententia Gordiani mutetur'.
169