Monday, February 28, 2011

LECTURE REVIEW I


ARCHAIC PERIOD: From foundation of Rome to the expedition of the
 ________________________________ in -367.
WHAT DID THE LEGES LICINIAE SEXTAE REGULATE?
1.____________________________________________________________
2.___________________________________________________________
3. ____________________________________________________________
OTHER PRO-PLEBEIAN LAWS WERE:
1.       Lex Hortensia: _____________________________________________
2.       Lex _____________: Allowed marriages between patricians and plebeians
3.       Lex Valeria Horatia________________________________________

REPUBLICAN PERIOD: From the Leges Liciniae Sextae to _________________________
The ordinary magistratures were:
1.       Consul: ________________________________________________________
2.       _________: In charge of justice administration
3.       Quaestor: Helpers of the Consul and administration of the taxes
4.       _________: ____________________________________________________
5.       Aedil:  Religious functions and later urban police
Characteristics of the magistrature:
1.       Gratuitous
2.       _____________
3.       Collegiate
4.       ____________
5.       Accountability
Magistrates were elected by____________________________
PRINCIPATE/ CLASSIC PERIOD:  From Augustus (0) to 211 AC
(Murder of Septimius Severus)
Roman Empire expands. The law reaches technical perfection.
It is a very creative period in terms of the law.
The Jurists receive Ius respondendi which is ___________________________________
DOMINATE/ POST CLASSIC PERIOD:  From 211 AC  to 1456
476 Romulus Augustus is defeated by a ____________ king.
Rome moves to _________________
During the administration of Justinian the:
______________ ___________________ _______________ was compiled.
 It had four main parts
Institutas: _________________________
Codex: ___________________________
Digestae: __________________________
Novellae: ____________________________

The Roman Empire is conquered by the _____________ in ____________________

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Useful reading for your assignment

Browsing online, I found this very short reading that has useful information for your assignment, which you should be working on already!! it can be found in http://www.roman-empire.net/articles/article-021.html
I am copying the first part of the text to get you started. Check it out, comment, ask, take a look at the cited bibliography and start writing, it is easier to write short pieces steadily than the whole piece on one attempt. Last, but not least, enjoy!


Underlying yet Unwritten
The Standards of Care and the Lex Aquilia

by Andrew Mason
originally prepared for Professor Weinrib, University of Toronto
 
In Ancient Rome the only acts recognised as criminal were "exceptional invasions of public security or of the general order of society." As such, Roman ‘criminal law’ would have failed to meet the needs of any highly organised society. The Romans decided upon a "practical remedy," the laws of Delict, by which they "extended the doctrine of civil obligations," to cover the realm of personal property. Violations of these standards of care carried with them "penal consequences." Private law was originally dominated by the Twelve Tables, which soon became "harsh and inflexible antique rules" in cosmopolitan Rome. The "punitive vengeance" of the Twelve Tables evolved into legal sanctions to compel compensation when damage was done to private property. However, these sanctions retained a distinct "punitive character."
Sanctions were thus developed to protect three principal rights of the Roman citizen not originally protected by criminal law: the security of his property, his security from theft and his right to be "protected from deliberate anti-social attacks" on his dignity. The Lex Aquilia governed loss wrongfully inflicted to property (damnum iniuria datum), whereas the Delicts of Furtum, Rapina and Iniuria were designed to deal with theft, robbery and attacks on personal dignity respectively. In order to be liable under the Lex Aquilia the defendant had to be found guilty of intent and culpable conduct (iniuria datum), and thus to have "wrongfully inflicted" loss (datum) on the plaintiff.
The early Romans maintained strict standards that governed personal behaviour and this is reflected in the legal reasoning implicit in the lex. Frier argued that while the ancient Romans "were under no general obligation" to ensure that others did not experience material loss, they were required "to act with care" in circumstances where their actions risked causing such loss to another. An examination of the twin pillars of the lex, the Praetor’s Edict and the juristical interpretations of the Lex Aquilia (illustrated by the actions ad factum and actio utiles) and selected cases from Frier’s Casebook on the Roman Law of Delict will demonstrate that unwritten ‘standards of care’ clearly existed in Roman law though they are never mentioned explicitly. The foremost legal reasoning behind the lex was the understanding that one had a civic responsibility as a Roman to not wrongfully cause another loss.


Standards of care as expressed by Culpa and Dolus
"Loss wrongfully inflicted" (damnum iniuria datum) forms the basis of Aquilian liability. Definitions of the term "iniuria" changed during the evolution of Roman law. The term was originally held to mean "without legal right." Juristical interpretation lent iniuria an additional meaning, that of "wrongfulness." Defendants were considered only guilty of inflicting loss without legal right if they had "acted in a way positively improper and worthy of legal reproach." The concept of "wrongfulness" strongly suggests that "legal rules" governing what conduct was expected from citizens "in various situations." Frier points out that the Lex Aquilia "only sketchily described the content of such rules" and that those which do exist are the creation of the jurists. This is not unsurprising however. The early ancient Romans, a people with both a traditional loathing for autocracy and a deep respect for the rights of the citizen would have resisted codifying laws explicitly stating what conduct was expected of them. Nicholas argues that the Romans would have interpreted such an attempt to impose defined duties as "an unwarranted restriction on personal freedom." Thus ‘standards of care’ as expressed in the Lex Aquilia were not codified, but can be defined as such: citizens were expected to act in the manner befitting a Roman.
As citizens, Romans were obliged to understand the "prerequisites of social life" and were expected to tailor their actions so as to avoid causing loss to others. In Case 19 Paul maintains that a tree-trimmer on private land is liable for killing a passing slave by "throwing down a branch" because in failing to call out or "foresee what a careful person should have foreseen" he had violated these social prerequisites. Culpa (fault), as Paul stipulated, arises when a defendant ignores the mutually understood, but unwritten, obligations of the Roman and wrongfully causes loss to another.
It is for this reason that Ulpianus "construes iniuria as loss inflicted by culpa" even when "the wish to harm" was absent, for one has a duty to be careful and aware. Dolus, (intentional fault) arises when one ignores these obligations "with a deliberate intent" to cause loss. The civic obligations implicit in the notions of culpa and dolus imply the existence of an unwritten standard of care, and Frier even describes the adherence to the aforementioned obligations as a "duty of care". Daube points out that the existence of a third standard of Aquilian liability, that of casus (accident) can only be seen as concerned with compensation, because unlike culpa (characterised by negligence) or dolus (characterised by evil intent) sheer accident does not involve a breach of any standard of care. It is important to note that the juristical interpretation of the lex there was no liability for casus....

(For the whole paper visit the link above, it is interesting and will help you understand the topic so you can write a good essay. Post any questions about the terms or concepts, we can work them out together. I am copying the bibliography as well, go to the library and take a look at the available books)


Bibliography
Amos, Sheldon. The History and Principles of the Civil Law of Rome. London, Kegan Paul, Trench and Co., 1883.
Daube, David. Roman Law. Edinburg University Press, 1969.
Frier, Bruce W. A Casebook on the Roman Law of Delict. Scholars Press, Atlanta, 1989.
Frier, Bruce W. The Rise of the Roman Jurists. Princeton University Press, 1985.
Jolowicz, H.F. "The Original Scope of the Lex Aquilia and the Question of Damages" Law Quarterly Review 38 (1922)
Kelly, J.M. "The Meaning of the Lex Aquilia", Law Quarterly Review 80 (1964)
Leage, R.W. Roman Private Law. London, Macmillan and Co., 1961.
Nicholas, Barry. An Introduction to Roman Law. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1972.




Thursday, February 17, 2011

Welcome to Foundations of South African Law 2011

Dear Students,

Welcome to Foundations of South African Law, one of the most exciting subjects of your entire career. In this class you will get an overview of most of the private law subjects that you will learn through your Law School journey. In continental law we call this CIVIL LAW, because it is the law to be applied for the relationships between civilians/citizens. By the end of the course you should be able to understand the structure of private law in ancient Rome, which will lead you to understand the structure of private law in modern South Africa

We are about to embark in a journey through the roots of our private law. We will travel in time and do a trek throughout history following the steps of the law from Rome before Christ, to South Africa today. In that trip we will witness the birth of South African Law and its most fundamental principles, which are still the backbone of our legal system. 

This experience, if you own it, will leave you with a structured idea of the private law in South Africa, and it will give you tools to structure your mind towards working with the law in the search for justice. It will help you become Jurists rather than mere technicians of the rules. It will also imprint your minds with a history that is sadly repeated over and over in modern society , only knowing it will we be capable of getting over it. 

I leave you with a piece of Cicero’s thought, so you get a taste of what I am referring to:

"The budget should be balanced; the Treasury should be refilled,
public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should
be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands
should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt.  People must again
learn to work, instead of living on public assistance."

--Cicero, 55 BC

FIAT LUX

To get you started, take a look at  this link about FAQ of Roman Law: http://archiv.jura.uni-saarland.de/Rechtsgeschichte/Ius.Romanum/RoemRFAQ-e.html