Original scientific paper

https://doi.org/10.30925/zpfsr.39.3.3

ANTICHRESIS IN ROMAN LEGAL DOCTRINE

Ines Matić orcid.org/0000-0002-6101-8445 ; University of Rijeka Faculty of Law, Rijeka, Croatia
Anamari Petranović ; University of Rijeka Faculty of Law, Rijeka, Croatia

Abstract

The paper addresses the problem of definition and content of the antichresis institute approaching the fragments in Justinian’s Digest (Marcian’s D.13.7.33. and D.20.1.11.1; Paul’s D.20.2.8) since their fundamental reference as the only Roman legal sources that explicitly address this institute. The analysis of Marcian’s passages D.13.7.33. and D.20.1.11.1, along with relevant accents of legal doctrine, outlines
the key elements of antichresis and presents the theories referring legal nature of this institute, suggesting that antichresis and pactum antichreticum are not synonyms (as / has been/ usually presumed), but occur as two different legal institutes thus including essentially different functions, and consequently, different system of legal protection.
Segment of the paper focused on the analysis of Paul’s text D.20.2.8., introduces the basic features of tacit antichresis (antichresis tacita) correlated with the concept of consensual antichresis.

Keywords

pactum antichreticum; antichresis; tacit antichresis; Roman law; innominate contracts; pledge

Hrčak ID:

216560

URI

https://hrcak.srce.hr/216560

Publication date:

28.12.2018.

Article data in other languages: german italian croatian

Visits: 2.456 *