Digest excerpt about the rei vindicatio compiling the opinions of the Ulpian and Paulus from the 6th-century Littera Florentina.

In Roman law, rei vindicatio (from Latin 'claim of the subject') was a legal action by which the plaintiff demands that the defendant return a thing that belongs to the plaintiff. It may be used only when the plaintiff owns the thing, and the defendant has wrongly claimed or assumed possession of the same thing, and is currently impeding the plaintiff's possession of the thing.[1]

The plaintiff could also institute an actio furti (a personal action) to punish the defendant. If the thing could not be recovered, the plaintiff could claim damages from the defendant with the aid of the condictio furtiva (a personal action). With the aid of the actio legis Aquiliae (a personal action), the plaintiff could claim damages from the defendant.

The term originated in ancient Roman law. It was derived from the ius civile, and therefore was available only to Roman citizens.

Specification of the thing

edit

The function of rei vindicatio remains the same in most modern legal systems as it was in ancient Rome. However, Roman law was much more particular about the specification of the "thing". A plaintiff could not have won a case without specifying the thing in question.

At a theoretical level, Roman jurists identified three kinds of "thing":

  • Corpus unitum
  • Corpus coniunctum
  • Corpus ex distantibus was not a single thing, but a bundle of independent things, such as a herd of cattle. Cattle were so important in Roman society that Roman jurists developed the regulation on cattle on a full scale. Corpus ex distantibus was the most disputed of the three.
edit

Two law schools in Rome, the Sabinian school and the Proculian school, remained influential from the late Republic throughout the classical period. Most modern Romanists consider these schools to be influenced to some extent by Greek philosophy. They say that the Sabinian school was the student of Stoicism, while the Proculian school followed Aristotle or Peripateticism. Greek influence is especially evident in classical Roman thinking on accession and specification. Sabinians, following Stoicism, argued that in these areas hyle ‘substance’ supersedes eidos ‘form’. Proculians countered that eidos is the decisive factor for a fate of a thing.

See also

edit

References

edit
  1. ^ Berger, Adolf (1953). Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law. Vol. 43 (Part 2). Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society. p. 672. ISBN 0-87169-435-2. OCLC 873814450. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) (reprinted in 1991)


📚 Artikel Terkait di Wikipedia

Usucaption

altered by the Actio Publiciana (see Gaius 4.36) which gave scope in the vindicatio (the action for property) for a fictitious usucaption. Such a situation

Private law

The precise nature of the contract was disputed, as shown below. Rei vindicatio: a legal action by which the plaintiff demands that the defendant return

South African property law

ownership: the rei vindicatio and the actio negatoria Ownership includes the entitlement of exclusive possession of res. The rei vindicatio, or vindicatory

Servitude (Roman law)

(ius proiiciendi protegendive). The owner of the dominant estate had a vindicatio servitutis (this may also appear as actio confessoria in post-classical

Roman law

The precise nature of the contract is disputed.[citation needed] Rei vindicatio is a legal action by which the plaintiff demands that the defendant return

Littera Florentina

Section about the rei vindicatio from the codex.

Mlombo v Fourie

on May 29, 1964. Mlombo, the owner of the property, instituted the rei vindicatio action against Fourie for having fraudulently ceased to possess it. The

Specificatio (Roman law)

this rule by reference to the rei vindicatio which requires the vindicator to name the subject of the rei vindicatio. The rights over the old items became