On What Is Just Regarding the Alienation of Property of Minors

Schilterus, in Exerc. ad ff. 37. §. 117., expressly taught that the Condictio Indebiti lawsuit for recovery of money paid by mistake does not regularly belong to a ward if he has paid, and established that a special case and exception to the rule is contained in L. 41. ff. de Condictione Indeb., when yet he himself above in Exerc. 24. §. 25. taught the contrary most clearly and correctly, and brought forward L. 29. ff. eôd. to this end. We also wonder why the learned doctors, when they speak of a reprobated natural obligation, join the obligation of a ward made without the authority of a tutor and a woman acting as a surety, when yet in this case the reprobation produces much wider effects, namely even with respect to a third party, whereas in the former it produces them only with respect to oneself. See t. t. ff. ad SCt. Vellej. Digest on the Senatus Consultum Velleianum. But just as the doctors primarily except three cases where a ward is also held Civiliter civilly/legally: (1) if he has committed fraud in a contract, L. 1. §. 15. ff. depos. Digest on deposit; (2) if the obligation arises from the thing itself, L. furiosus 46. ff. de O. & A.; (3) if the ward has become richer, L. 5. pr. & §. 1. ff. b. t., so we do not make our own the dispute with Lord Lauterbach, who in Colleg. Theor. Pract. tit. de Pact. §. 41. denies that the ward is civilly obligated in this last case.