Page 205 - Latent Defect or Excessive Price?Exploring Early Modern Legal Approach to Remedying Defects in Goods Exchanged for Money - Bruijn

CHAPTER FOUR
literature throughout Europe.
4.3.3 Just price
Similar to what was the case with assessing a price reduction, humanist scholars adopted a price determination based on the value commonly attributed. 'The just price is the price that is not that what whomever thinks it is, but what is commonly considered so', opines Cujas' teacher Loriot.204 Wesenbeck and Doneau have the same view.205
Oldendorp more specifically applies the same formula directly to the remedy for lesion beyond moiety. He adds, however, that local custom and time - probably in view of price fluctuations - should also be taken into account.206 From a reference to an observation by Andreas von Gail (1526-1587), assessor to the Reichskammergericht207, it follows that Oldendorp supports the view that an independent third party should assess the item's price (aestimator), which was the solution already offered by Bartolus and Baldus.208 Sichardus endorses such an estimation by appointed impartial assessors who had to judge the thing's value in accordance with local custom, the thing's quality and quantity.209 Doneau adds that in doing so, the judge must ensure himself of their professionality and appoint no one else but experts in the field of the item under litigation.210
Dumoulin demonstrates that he has been influenced by scholastic thinking. The just price should not depend on whatever price one would be able to find in the market, but it
204 Loriot, Secundam ff., to D. 18.1, no. 28, p. 312: 'iustum autem est pretium, quod tunc non quilibet arbitretur, sed quod communiter aestimaretur, l. pretia, in prin., ad l. Falc. \[D. 35.2.63pr.\]'.
205 Wesenbecius, Tractatus et responsa, vol. 5, cons. 250, no. 3, p. 1557: '... quod unusquisque pro re daret, non unus aut alter'; Donellus, Ad codicis partes, to C. 4.44.2, no. 3, p. 203: 'Verum pretium est, quanti res vere valet dictum ad differentiam eius pretii, quod venditor arbitrio suo ex affectione et utilitate sua aestimat... Est enim iuris certi sententia, pretia rerum non ex affectione aut utilitate singulorum aestimari, sed communiter fungi. Id est tanti res aestimari, quanti communiter valent, l. pretia, D. ad leg. Fal. \[D. 35.2.63pr.\], l. si servum, D. ad leg. Aquil. \[D. 9.2.33pr.\]'; idem, Commentarii, vol. 5, p. 45, no. 14.
206 Oldendorp, Progymnasmata, no. 7, p. 251,: 'primum aestimanda est qualitas rei ex communi hominum opinione, non ex privato adfectu, l. pretia rerum, ff, ad leg. Falcid. \[D. 35.2.63\]. Deinde consuetudo loci tempusque venditonis, ubi et quando contrahitur'.
207 O. von Gschließer, 'Gail, Andreas von', in: NDB 6 (1964), p. 38ff.
208 Oldendorp, Progymnasmata, p. 251, no. 7: 'Egregiam practicam faciendi aestimationem rerum tradit Gail,
Obs. 19, de pign. num. 6.7'; Gail, Observationes, 2.18, nos. 6, 7, p. 206: '...in omnibus casibus in quibus magis judicio quam testimonio opus est, judex debeat constituere aestimatorem, ad faciendam illa aestimatorem et ad proferendum illud iudicium, textus in l. ff, de vent. inspic. \[D. 25.4.1.10\]. Item quando rerum aestimatio magis in intellectu quam visu constitit, quod tunc periti in arte deputari debeant, ut justo valore rem aestiment, per textum, in § quod autem dictum est in Authent. de non alien aut permut. reb. eccles., \[X. 3.9.?\] text in l. semel, C. de re milit. lib. 12 \[C. 12.35.6\] et in dict. leg. I, § I, ff. de vent. inspic. \[D. 25.4.1.1\], Bart., ibid. nu. 4 \[Bartolus, Commentaria, to D. 25.4, no. 4, fo. 40\] et in proem. Digest. nu. 8 \[Bartolus, Commentaria, proem, no. 8, fo. 3\]; Baldus, ibid, nu. 6 \[Bartolus, Commentaria, to D. 25.4, no. 6, fo. 40\]; Bart. praeclare in l. creditores, no. 29, C. de pignor. et hypoth. \[Bartolus, Commentaria, to C. 8.13.3, no. 29, fo. 99\]'; for the commentators see 2.3.2.1.
209 Sichardus, Dictata, to C. 4.58.2, no. 19, p. 464: 'Ideo Bart. et Bald. hic dant meliorem practicam, scilicet ut iudex cogat partes eligere aliquot aestimatores vel etiam hodie fascerent hoc iurati aestimatores qui si de pretio non possint convenire, possent partes eligere tertium einen Obmann vel etiam judex posset deinde eligere, quem sequeretur, argument. l. fin, supra de iud.\[C. 3.1.18\].'
210 Donellus, Ad codicis partes, to C. 4.44.2, no. 5, p. 204: 'Et ita est, cum de re aestimanda, quae in arte et peritia consistit, agitur, non debent adhiberi nisi periti eius artis et rei, de qua agitur l. 1, circa prin. D., de vent. inspic. \[D. 37.9.1pr.\], l. semel, infra, de re mili. lib. 12 \[D. 49.16.?\]'.
195