Page 354 - Latent Defect or Excessive Price?Exploring Early Modern Legal Approach to Remedying Defects in Goods Exchanged for Money - Bruijn

CODES OF CIVIL LAW
343 pertains to defects for which the aedilician remedies were available in ius commune- theory, whereas the puzzling text of § 344 refers to cases of eviction by a third party and given warranties.81 This suggestion presents a significant shift away from ius commune- doctrine, which had always regarded the remedies for eviction and breach of a given warranty as a subspecies of the action on the contract and consequently ascribed a 30- year limitation to it. The latter view is still adhered to by the Code civil and, as far as eviction is concerned, the Bürgerliche Gesetzbuch.82
However, the fact that later Prussian law did not dare to fully break with Roman law boundaries, as suggested by Könne, can be derived from Hierzemensel's Ergänzungen. Admittedly, in his comments on §§ 343 and 344, he also argues that the latter paragraph refers to eviction. However, for the remedies against such breaches of the giving party's safeguarding duty he persists in a 30-year period.83 The short periods in the paragraphs mentioned only apply to what Hierzemensel terms 'eigentliche actio redhibitoria', viz. to cases in which there is no fraud or error. A similar interpretation of the ALR can only be explained from a still lingering adherence to ius commune-theory, since it runs counter to both the views of Klein in his System and Svarez in his Unterricht who explicitly mention eviction as a breach of the duty to safeguard the recipient of the thing to which the short limitation periods of § 343 and § 344 apply.84
Another difficulty with regard to limitation concerns the remedies for non- performance. According to I, IX, § 546, remedies for non-performance, e.g, for wrong, non-, or late delivery85, are subject to a 30-year period of limitation and not to the short periods which are determined for breach of Gewährleistung. This huge difference in limitation is remarkable, if one takes into account that the ALR considers a breach of Gewährleistung a species of non-performance. If Gewährleistung is part of the promisor's duty to perform it would have made more sense to subject a breach of Gewährleistung to the same period of limitation as a breach of non-performance.
For particular categories of remedies this had indeed been decreed by the statute of 31 March 1838.86 This statute fixes a two-year limitation period for all remedies brought by a wide variety of people involved in everyday commercial activities. E.g. hawkers, salesmen, representatives of industry, and pharmacists can be sued for two years on the
81 Klein, System, I, § 122, note 4, pp. 150-151.
82 See 7.7.3.
83 Hierzemensel refers to I, IX, 9, § 546 ALR: 'Die einmal angefangene Verjährung durch Nichtgebrauch
wird, wenn die Gesetze nicht ausdrücklich eine andere Frist bestimmen, in einem Zeiträume von dreyßig Jahren vollendet. (§. 629. sqq.)', Hiersemensel, Ergänzungen, to §§ 343-345, no. XI, pp. 192-193; Leske, Vergleichende Darstellung, vol. 1, § 57, p. 187, footnote 4.
84 Klein, System, to I, V, § 118, ALR, p. 147: 'Auch wegen der Ansprüche eines Dritten, dieselben mögen in einem Eigenthumsanspruch and die vertragsmässig gegebene Sache, einem behaupteten Recht auf die Sache, oder darin bestehen, dass ein der Sache anklebendes Recht bestritten wird, muss der Geber Vertretung leisten...'; Svarez, Unterricht, pp. 106-108; Besides the remedies for Gewährleistung, the recipient of a defective thing can sue the promisor for deliberate fraud (Betrug). This remedy lasts for 30- years in accordance with I, V, §350 ALR and I, IX, § 546 ALR.
85 I,V,§285-§291ALR.
86 'Gesetz wegen Einführung kürzerer Verjährungsfristen', in: Handbuch, no. 15, pp. 437-438.
350