Bracton: Thorne Edition: English. Volume 2, Page 296

Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Volume 2, Page 296

Next

Go to Volume: Page:

For whom the actio iniuriarum lies and against whom.

[002] ¹The action lies for him who has suffered the affront or injuria against him who
[003] perpetrated it, who beat, struck and mistreated.² In it the judge will condemn the
[004] wrongdoer to pay a sum as large as that for which the plaintiff has said he would
[005] not have suffered the harm,³ the judge however taxing the amount.

For whom the actio quod metus causa lies and against whom.

[007] ⁴The action quod metus causa lies for one who has transferred, sold or promised his
[008] property when under reasonable apprehension of harm, and lies against him who
[009] induced such apprehension. It is called reasonable apprehension because it must
[010] be such as might occur in a resolute, not in a timid man.⁵ The action de dolo is
[011] available to him against whom a fraud was perpetrated. The action or interdict
[012] unde vi, according as it is double, that is, recuperatory and penal, lies for one
[013] forcibly ejected against the person who forcibly ejected him for recovering the
[014] possession of the immovable from which he was ejected, [in which case it is double
[015] in the person of the ejector, as will be explained below in [the portion on] the assise
[016] of novel disseisin,]⁶ [and for a penalty], in the computation of which neither death
[017] nor accident excuses the ejector.⁷

For whom the interdict quod vi aut clam lies and against whom.

[019] ⁸The action or interdict quod vi aut clam lies against him who has built or destroyed
[020] a new work on another's land or estate clandestinely, so as to avoid being prohibited
[021] from so doing.⁹ By this action he who built or destroyed will be compelled to
[022] restore what he has done to its original state at his own expense, that the thing
[023] may once more be as it was and ought to be.¹⁰ These actions or interdicts are not
[024] available to heirs nor do they lie against heirs, [that is], to the extent that they are
[025] penal, but to the extent that they are restitutory they do lie against them.¹¹

For whom the interdict de itinere actuque privato lies and against whom.

[027] ¹²The action or interdict of private right of way or carriage is given against those
[028] who wrongfully prevent another from using his servitude. ¹³For the praetor says,
[029] ‘I prohibit the use of force to prevent the enjoyment of a private right of way or
[030] carriage which the other party has used this year neither by force nor by stealth
[031] nor by leave or license’.¹⁴ All these interdicts arise ex maleficio.

Of the interdict quorum bonorum.

[033] ¹⁵The interdict or action quorum bonorum,¹⁶ which does not arise ex maleficio but
[034] quasi ex contractu, is given to the nearer heirs on the seisin of an ancestor and lies
[035] against any who possess.

If several actions are available for the same thing and one has been chosen.¹⁷

[037] ¹⁸Of civil actions in rem some are on the possession,

Notes

1. Br. and Azo, 179, 183

2. Infra 325, 437-9

3. Selden Soc. vol. 60, cix-cxvi; supra 282, infra 325-6, 438, iv, 363

4. Br. and Azo, 180, 184; infra iii, 171

5. Azo, Summa Cod. 2.19, no. 3: supra 65

6. Supra 291, infra iii, 26; novel disseisin triplex: infra 324, iii, 157

7. Infra iii, 75, 77

8. Br. and Azo, 180, 184

9. Infra iii, 189 ff.

10. Infra 325

11. Infra 324

12. Br. and Azo, 180, 184

13-14. D. 43.19.1. pr. for the words of the edict, here mutilated by Br's copyist; supra 157, 158, infra iii, 163, 165, 166-7

15. Br. and Azo, 180, 184

16. Supra 295

17. From 297, line 7, for ‘Alia divisio actionum’

18. Br. and Azo, 180, 184