Praetor Formula as an Instrument of Conceptual Legal Thinking in Roman Private Law of the Pre-Classical and Classical Periods
https://doi.org/10.22394/2686-7834-2022-2-22-38
Abstract
The article discusses the formula, which is a means of fixing the claim in Roman private law of the pre -classical and classical periods. The nature and essence of the formula are quite little studied in the special legal literature. At the same time, most authors are limited to the general characteristic of the structure of the formulas, indicating that in the formulary process the documentary formula had the same meaning that in the legis actio were legitimate claims declared orally. According to the authors, the study of the formula should be based on the general laws of the evolution of Roman private law. The work proves that the emergence of the formula is an indicator of the transformation of associative-shaped legal thinking into a conceptual thinking, and the formula itself is an important tool for conceptual thinking used to construct subjective rights, as well as giving them formal certainty and legal force.
About the Authors
N. V. Razuvaev
North-West Institute of Management of the Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President
of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Nikolay V. Razuvaev, Doctor of Sience (Jurisprudence), Head of the Department of Civil and Labor Law of the Law Faculty
St. Petersburg
M. V. Tregubov
North-West Institute of Management of the Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President
of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Michail V. Tregubov, Head of the Department of Law of the Law Faculty, PhD in Jurisprudence
St. Petersburg
References
1. Baygusheva, Yu. V. Bank Guarantee: A PhD Thesis in Law [Bankovskaja garantija: avtoref. dis. … kand. jurid. nauk]. SPb., 2008. 22 p. (In Rus.)
2. Belov, V. A. Bill Objections [Veksel’nye vozrazhenija]. Legislation [Zakonodatel’stvo], 2000. No. 7. P. 10–18. (In Rus.)
3. Valdecasas, G. G. Publiciana in Rem Actio in our Contemporary Legal System [Publiciev isk v nashem dejstvujushhem pravoporjadke]. The Herald of the Supreme Arbitrazh Court of the Russian Federation [Vestnik Vysshego Arbitrazhnogo Suda Rossiiskoi Federatsii], 2018. No. 3. P. 168–214. (In Rus.)
4. Grimm, D. D. Lectures on the Dogma of Roman Law [Lekcii po dogme rimskogo prava]. M.: Zertsalo, 2015. 496 p. (In Rus.)
5. Gromov, S. A. Material and Legal Objections of the Debtor Against the Claims of the Creditor. The Practice of Applying General Provisions on Obligations [Material’no-pravovye vozrazhenija dolzhnika protiv trebovanij kreditora. Praktika primenenija obshhih polozhenij ob objazatel’stvah] / Otv. ed. M. A. Rozhkova. M.: Statut, 2011. P. 133–173. (In Rus.)
6. Humboldt, W. von. On the Structure of Human Language and Its Influence on the Spiritual Development of Mankind [O razlichii stroeniya chelovecheskogo jazyka i ego vlijanii na duhovnoe razvitie chelovechestva]. Humboldt W. von. Background. Selected Works on Linguistics [Gumbol’dt W. fon. Izbrannye trudy po jazykoznaniju]. M.: Nauka, 1984. P. 37–298. (In Rus.)
7. Demin, A. A. About Legal Acts and the Civil Law Regulation [O juridicheskih faktah v mehanizme grazhdanskopravovogo regulirovanija]. Laws of Russia: experience, analysis, practice [Zakony Rossii: opyt, analiz, praktika]. 2020. No. 4. P. 104–108. (In Rus.)
8. Dernburg, G. Pandekty. T. 1: General part. M.: Univ. type., 1906. 481 p. (In Rus.)
9. Derkho, D. S. To the Question of the Development of the Institute of Limitation and Its Current State [K voprosu o razvitii instituta iskovoj davnosti i ego sovremennom sostojanii]. Judge [Sud’ja], 2016. No. 3. P. 34–37. (In Rus.)
10. Dobrovolsky, A. A., Ivanova, S. A. Main Problems of the Claim Form of Protection of Rights [Osnovnye problemy iskovoj formy zashchity prava]. M.: Publishing House of Moscow University [Izd-vo Mosk. un-ta], 1979. 190 p. (In Rus.)
11. Dozhdev, D. V. Possession in the System of Civil Law [Vladenie v sisteme grazhdanskogo prava]. Bulletin of Civil Law [Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava], 2009. No. 4. P. 6–42. (In Rus.)
12. Dozhdev, D. V. Good Conscience (Bona Fides) as a Principle of Legal Communication. Problems of the Value Approach in Law: Traditions and Renewal [Dobraja sovest’ (bona fides) kak princip pravovogo obshchenija. Problemy cennostnogo podhoda v prave: tradicii i obnovlenie]. M.: ISL RAS , 1996. P. 29–40. (In Rus.)
13. Dozhdev, D. V. Roman Private Law [Rimskoe chastnoe pravo]. 3rd edition, corrected and supplemented. M.: Norma; INFRA-M, 2013. 784 p. (In Rus.)
14. Emelyanov, V. V. Ritual in Ancient Mesopotamia [Ritual v Drevnej Mesopotamii]. St. Petersburg: Azbuka-Classika; Petersburg Oriental Studies [Azbuka-Klassika; Peterburgskoe vostokovedenie], 2003. 320 p. (In Rus.)
15. Zalivalova, L. N. To the Question of the Study of Byzantine Law. Modernization of Russian Legislation in the Context of Constitutional Reform. Proceedings of the XVII All-Russian December Legal Readings in Kostroma [K voprosu ob izuchenii vizantijskogo prava. Modernizacija rossijskogo zakonodatel’stva v uslovijah konstitucionnoj reformy. Sbornik trudov XVII Vserossijskih dekabr’skih juridicheskih chtenij v Kostrome] / Ed. G. G. Bril, V. V. Gruzdev. Kostroma: Kostroma State University Publishing House [Izd. Kostromskogo gos. un-ta], 2021. P. 302–306. (In Rus.)
16. Zekkel, E. Second Rights in Civil Law [Sekundarnye prava v grazhdanskom prave]. Bulletin of Civil Law [Vestnik grazhdanskogo prava], 2007. No. 2. P. 204–252. (In Rus.)
17. Zom, R. Institutions: History and System of Roman Civil Law. Part 2. System. Issue 1. General part and real right [Institucii: Istorija i sistema rimskogo grazhdanskogo prava. Ch. 2. Sistema. Vyp. 1. Obshchaja chast’ i veshchnoe pravo]. Sergiev Posad: Publishing House of I. I. Ivanov [Tip. I. I. Ivanova], 1916. 375 p. (In Rus.)
18. Yering, R. von. The Spirit of Roman Law at Various Stages of its Development [Duh rimskogo prava na razlichnyh stupenjah ego razvitija]. SPb.: Publishing House of V. Bezobrazova and Co., 1875. Part 1. 321 p. (In Rus.)
19. Kelsen, G. Pure Doctrine of Law, Justice and Natural Law [Chistoe uchenie o prave, spravedlivost’ i estestvennoe pravo]. SPb.: Publishing House “Alef-Press”, 2015. 704 p. (In Rus.)
20. Kniper, R. Legal Facts: The Emergence and Decline of One Institution in German Law [Juridicheskie fakty: vozniknovenie i upadok odnogo pravovogo instituta v nemetskom prave]. [Electronic resource]. URL: https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=32401565&pos=3;-88#pos=3;-88 (accessed date: 21.05.2022).
21. Kolemasova, V. S. Application of the Norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on the Limitation Period [Primenenie norm Grazhdanskogo kodeksa Rossijskoj Federacii ob iskovoj davnosti]. Judge [Sud’ja], 2016. No. 3. P. 20–25. (In Rus.)
22. Kofanov, L. L. Lex and Ius: The Emergence and Development of Roman Law in the VIII–III centuries [Lex i ius: vozniknovenie i razvitie rimskogo prava v VIII–III vv. do n. e.]. BC. M.: Statut, 2006. 575 p. (In Rus.)
23. Krasheninnikov, E. A. The Main Issues of the Assignment of Claims. Essays on Commercial Law: Collection of Scientific Works. Issue 6 [Osnovnye voprosy ustupki trebovanija. Ocherki po torgovomu pravu: Sb. nauch. tr. Vyp. 6] / Ed. E. A. Krasheninnikova. Yaroslavl: Publishing House of Yaroslavl. State University named after P. G. Demidov [Izd-vo Jaroslavsk. gos. un-ta im. P. G. Demidova], 1999. P. 10–29. (In Rus.)
24. Kurbatov, A. A. Legal Proceedings in Archaic Athens [Sudoproizvodstvo v arhaicheskih Afinah]. State and Law [Gosudarstvo i pravo], 1993. No. 6. P. 119–127. (In Rus.)
25. Levy-Bruhl, L. Primitive Mentality [Pervobytnyj mentalitet]. St. Petersburg: European House [Evropejskij dom], 2002. 400 p. (In Rus.)
26. Lipshits, E. E. Law and Court in Byzantium in the IV–VIII Centuries [Pravo i sud v Vizantii v IV–VIII vv.]. L.: Nauka, 1976. 232 p. (In Rus.)
27. Lotman, Yu. M. The Problem of the Sign and the Sign System and the Typology of Russian Culture of the XI–XIX Centuries [Problema znaka i znakovoj sistemy i tipologija russkoj kul’tury XI–XIX vekov]. In: Lotman Yu. M. Semiosphere [Semiosfera]. St. Petersburg: Art-SPB, 2000. P. 400–417. (In Rus.)
28. Lukovskaya, D. I., Razuvaev, N. V. Pre-Socratic Doctrine of Justice and Law [Uchenie dosokratikov o spravedlivosti i zakone]. Bulletin of St. Petersburg State University. Right. Ser. 14. [Vestnik SPbGU. Pravo. Ser. 14]. 2015. Issue 3. P. 35–44. (In Rus.)
29. Markin, A. V. Fictions in Roman Law: Logical Nature and Legal Expediency [Fikcii v rimskom prave: logicheskaja priroda i pravovaja celesoobraznost’]. Science Vector of Togliatti State University. Ser.: Juridical sciences [Vektor nauki Tol’jattinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser.: Juridicheskie nauki], 2011. No. 2 (16). P. 243–245. (In Rus.)
30. Marr, N. Ya. Language [Jazyk]. In: Marr N. Ya. Basic Questions of Linguistics [Osnovnye voprosy jazykoznanija]. L.: Sotsekgiz, 1936. P. 127–137. (In Rus.)
31. Marchenko, M. N. Sources of Law [Istochniki prava]. M.: TK “Velby”, Prospekt Publishing House [TK “Velbi”, Izd-vo “Prospekt”], 2006. 760 p. (In Rus.)
32. Muromtsev, S. A. On the Conservatism of Roman Jurisprudence: Experience in the History of Roman Law [O konservatizme rimskoj jurisprudencii: Opyt po istorii rimskogo prava]. In: Muromtsev S. A. Selected Works on Roman and Civil Law [Izbrannye trudy po rimskomu i grazhdanskomu pravu]. M.: Center YurInfoR, 2004. P. 59–212. (In Rus.)
33. Novitsky, I. B. Fundamentals of Roman Civil Law [Osnovy rimskogo grazhdanskogo prava.]. M.: Prospekt, 2015. 272 p. (In Rus.)
34. Osokina, G. L. Civil Process: General Part [Grazhdanskij process: Obshchaja chast’]. M.: Norma; INFRA-M, 2013. 704 p. (In Rus.)
35. Potebnya, A. A. Thought and Language [Mysl’ i jazyk]. In: Potebnya A. A. Word and Myth [Slovo i mif]. M.: Pravda, 1989. P. 17–200. (In Rus.)
36. Rozhkova, M. A. Legal Facts of Civil and Procedural Law: Agreements on the Protection of Rights and Procedural Agreements [Juridicheskie fakty grazhdanskogo i processual’nogo prava: soglashenija o zashchite prav i processual’nye soglashenija]. M.: Statut, 2009. 168 p. (In Rus.)
37. Savel’ev, V. A. Justice (Aequitas) and Integrity (Bona Fides) in Roman Law, the Classical Period [Spravedlivost’ (aequitas) i dobrosovestnost’ (bona fides) v rimskom prave klassicheskogo perioda]. State and Law [Gosudarstvo i pravo], 2014. No. 3. P. 63–72. (In Rus.)
38. Savel’ev, V. A. Legal Technique of Roman Jurisprudence of the Classical Period [Juridicheskaja tehnika rimskoj jurisprudencii klassicheskogo perioda]. Journal of Russian Law [Zhurnal rossijskogo prava], 2008. No. 12 (144). P. 108–115. (In Rus.)
39. Savigny, F. K. The System of Modern Roman Law [Sistema sovremennogo rimskogo prava]. T. I. M.: Statut, 2011. 510 p. (In Rus.)
40. Salogubova, E. V. Roman Civil Process [Rimskij grazhdanskij process]. M.: Legal Bureau Gorodets, 1997. 144 p. (In Rus.)
41. Salkovsky, K. Institutions. Fundamentals of the System and History of Roman Private Law [Institucii. Osnovy sistemy i istorii rimskogo chastnogo prava]. Kyiv: Pyotr Barsky Publishing House [Tip. Petr Barskij], 1910. 608 p. (In Rus.)
42. Sedakov, S. Yu. The Role of the Kvirite Praetor in the Creation of the Norms of Roman Private Law of the Preclassical Period [Rol’ kviritskogo pretora v sozdanii norm rimskogo chastnogo prava predklassicheskogo perioda]. Ancient Law [Drevnee pravo], 1996. No. 1. P. 124–128. (In Rus.)
43. Sepir, E. Language. Introduction to the Study of Speech [Jazyk. Vvedenie v izuchenie rechi]. In: Sepir E. Selected Works on Linguistics and Cultural Studies [Izbrannye trudy po jazykoznaniju i kul’turologii]. M.: Publishing House. Group Progress, 2001. P. 26–203. (In Rus.)
44. Saussure, F. de. Course of General Linguistics [Kurs obshchej lingvistiki]. Ekaterinburg: Uralsk. University Publishing House [Izd-vo Ural’sk. un-ta], 1999. 432 p. (In Rus.)
45. Spirin, M. Yu. On the Modern Problems of Determining the Category of “Source of Law” [O sovremennyh problemah opredelenija kategorii “istochnik prava”]. Bulletin of the General and Branch Theory of Law [Vestnik obshchej i otraslevoj teorii prava]. 2022. No. 1 (3). P. 22–30. (In Rus.)
46. Tariverdieva, M. A. The Historical Role of The Latin Language in The Formation of Romance Languages and Cultures [Istoricheskaja rol’ latinskogo jazyka v formirovanii romanskih jazykov i kul’tur]. Bulletin of the Moscow Humanitarian Linguistic University. Ser.: Humanities [Vestnik Moskovskogo gumanitarnogo lingvisticheskogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye nauki]. 2018. No. 6 (11). P. 152–158. (In Rus.)
47. Tenier, L. Fundamentals of Structural Syntax [Osnovy strukturnogo sintaksisa]. Moscow: Progress, 1988. 656 p. (In Rus.)
48. Trikoz, E. N., Shvets, A. A. The Role of Fictions and Presumptions as Legal and Technical Means of Developing the System of Common Law (Based on the Example of Medieval England) [Rol’ fikcij i prezumpcij kak juridikotehnicheskih sredstv razvitija sistemy «obshchego prava» (na materialah srednevekovoj Anglii)]. Society and Law [Obshchestvo i pravo]. 2021. No. 1 (75). P. 124–129. (In Rus.)
49. Tumov, V. V. Extraordinary Jurisdiction in Ancient Rome of the Era of the Republic and the Period of the Principate: Historical and Legal Research : A PhD Thesis in Law [Jekstraordinarnaja jurisdikcija v Drevnem Rime epohi Respubliki i perioda Principata: istoriko-juridicheskoe issledovanie. Avtoref. dis. … k. ju. n]. Saratov: Saratov Legal University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs [Saratovsk. jurid. in-t MVD], 2007. 21 p. (In Rus.)
50. Tumov, V. V., Malinovskaya, N. V. Fiction as a Factor in the Formation of Jewish and Roman law [Fikcii kak faktor stanovlenija iudejskogo i rimskogo prava]. Bulletin of the Voronezh State University. Ser.: Right [Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta]. 2008. No. 1 (4). P. 45–56. (In Rus.)
51. Freidenberg, O. M. Myth and Literature of Antiquity [Mif i literatura drevnosti]. M.: Publishing House. Firm “Eastern Literature” RAS [Izdat. firma “Vostochnaja literature” RAN], 1998. 800 p. (In Rus.)
52. Foucault, M. Words and Things. Archeology of the Humanities [Slova i veshhi. Arheologija gumanitarnyh nauk]. St. Petersburg: A-cad Publishing House [Izd-vo “A-cad”], 1994. 407 p. (In Rus.)
53. Hart, G. L. A. The Concept of Law [Ponjatie prava]. St. Petersburg: Publishing House of St. Petersburg University [Izd-vo S.-Peterb. un-ta], 2007. 302 p. (In Rus.)
54. Khvostov, V. M. Experience in Characterizing the Concepts of Aequitas and Aequum Ius in Roman Classical Jurisprudence [Opyt harakteristiki ponjatij aequitas i aequum ius v rimskoj klassicheskoj jurisprudencii]. M.: University Publishing House [Universitet. tip.]. 1895. 317 p. (In Rus.)
55. Khvostov, V. M. The System of Roman Law [Sistema rimskogo prava]. M.: Spark, 1996. 522 p. (In Rus.)
56. Zweigert, K., Kjotz, H. Introduction to Comparative Law in the Field of Private Law. T. 1. Fundamentals [Vvedenie v sravnitel’noe pravovedenie v sfere chastnogo prava. T. 1. Osnovy]. M.: Intern. Relations [Mezhdunar. otnoshenija], 1998. 480 p. (In Rus.)
57. Shchennikova, L. V. On the Substantive Institute of Period of Limitation and Civil Procedural Right of Action [O material’no-pravovom institute iskovoj (pogasitel’noj) davnosti i grazhdansko-processual’nom prave na isk]. Bulletin of Civil Process [Vestnik grazhdanskogo processa]. 2017. No. 5. P. 12–28. (In Rus.)
58. Enneccerus, L. The Course of German Civil Law. T. 1: Introduction and General Part. Pt. 2 [Kurs germanskogo grazhdanskogo prava. T. 1: Vvedenie i Obshchaja chast’]. M.: Publishing House of Foreign Literature [Izd-vo inostr. lit-ry], 1950. 483 p. (In Rus.)
59. Arangio-Ruiz, V. Instituzioni di diritto romano. 14 ed. Napoli: E. Jovene, 1984. 564 p.
60. Bachofen, J. J. De romanorum judiciis civilibus de legis actionibus de formulis et de condictione: dissertatio historico-dogmatica. Göttingen: Dieterich, 1840. 346 p.
61. Beck, A. Zu den Grundprinzipien der Bona Fides im Römischen Vertragsrecht. Aequitas und Bona Fides. Festgabe für August Simonius. Basel: Helbing & Lichtenhahn, 1955. S. 9–27.
62. Birks, P. From legis actio to formula. The Irish Jurist. New series. 1969. Vol. 4. № 2. P. 356–367.
63. Biscardi, A. Sulla data della lex Aquilia. Scritti in memoria di Antonio Giuffre. Milano: Ed. Giuffre, 1967. Vol. 1. P. 84–94.
64. Hamsa, G. Zur Frage des Verhältnisses der vergleichenden Rechtsgeschichte zum römischen Recht. Studi in onore di Arnaldo Biscardi. Vol. II. Milano: Istituto Editoriale Cisalpino — La Goliardica, 1982. P. 1–23.
65. Koschaker, P. Europa und das römische Recht. München, Berlin: C. H. Beck Verlag, 1953. 232 p.
66. Kranjc, J. Die actio praescriptis verbis aus Formelaufbauproblem. Zeitschrift für Savigny-Stiftung für rechtsgeschichte. Romanistische Abteilung. 1989. Bd. 106. S. 434–436.
67. Watson, A. Roman Law Around 200 BC. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1971. 187 p.
68. Wolff, H. J. The Origin of Judicial Litigation Among the Greeks. Traditio: Studies in Ancient and Medieval History, Thought, and Religion. 1946. Vol. 4. P. 31–87.
Review
For citations:
Razuvaev N.V., Tregubov M.V. Praetor Formula as an Instrument of Conceptual Legal Thinking in Roman Private Law of the Pre-Classical and Classical Periods. Theoretical and Applied Law. 2022;(2):22-38. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22394/2686-7834-2022-2-22-38
Views:
503
Email this article 