[Vocabularius utriusque iuris]

is so called because he stands over the conducting of business, and it does not matter if he is placed over shops or any other business. As in Digest, same title, law "Whoever", 7, and law "Institor", 2, so that "institor" is said of him who is placed over selling goods in shops or any other business.

¶ Action of the Lex Aquilia

It contains two or three chapters, although one is not in use. Digest, same title, law "If a slave", paragraph "Of this law", in the Institutes, same title. The first chapter is concerning slaves killed or four-footed beasts which are counted in the number of cattle, as in that law "Aquilia", Digest, same title, where it speaks of animals which are kept and grazed in herds, such as sheep, goats, and oxen, horses, mules, donkeys. And according to Labeo, pigs; but not dogs, and much less wild beasts and bears, lions, etc. But elephants and camels are as if mixed. And therefore it is fitting that they be contained in the first chapter. In which case the condemnation is made for as much as the thing was worth at most in the previous year, in the said law "Aquilia", Digest, same title, and in the Institutes, same title, paragraph 3. The second chapter, which is not in use, is passed over here, as in Digest, same title, law "If a slave", paragraph "Of this law", where it is said that the second chapter of this law has gone into disuse. But the third chapter of this law is concerning those wounded, wild beasts killed, and other things broken, such as clothing, vases, and such things. In which case he who gave the damage is condemned for as much as the thing was worth thirty days back, estimating the price of the thing as said in the law "If a slave", paragraph "But in the third chapter", and in the same chapter, same title, in the following paragraph. And in this action, if anyone denies that he gave the damage, he is condemned for the double. Digest, same title, law 1, paragraph 1. It is called the Aquilian Law from Aquilius, a tribune of the plebs, according to the legal text, book 5, who established it on the Aventine Hill in the time of the discord between the people and the plebs. Digest, same title, law 1, and by means of the concord that was made, it has the force of law.

¶ Direct action of mandate

It is sought by the mandator and his heir. Digest, same title, law "If truly", paragraph "Final", and law "If by mandate of Titius, first response", and paragraph 1. Against the mandatary or procurator after the mandate was accepted. Digest, same title, law "If for remunerating", paragraph 1. And it matters that that act was done which he mandated, for example, he mandated that you buy land; if it was in my interest that it be bought, you are held after the mandate was accepted,

however, if I myself buy the same land, or another interest of mine has ceased, this action ceases, according to Azo. Digest, same title, law "If a procurator", paragraph "Of mandate action".

¶ Contrary action of mandate

It competes for the mandatary, Digest, same title, law "If truly not for remunerating", paragraph "Contrary", or to the procurator for expenses against the mandator, provided he has not exceeded the limits. But if he expended something usefully, he does not have the mandate judgment in that, but only that of the management of business, according to Martinus a 12th-century jurist, although Johannes Johannes Bassianus, a jurist and Accursius author of the Great Gloss contend otherwise, through law "Not", Institutes, same title, paragraph "He who", and Digest, same title, law "But Perculus", with the following law in the beginning, and Code, On those who manage, law "Final", in the gloss, finally. But if I mandated to you that you buy land for me, and you paid the price for the land, you will sue me by the mandate action so that I undertake the obligation by which you are held to the seller. For I also can sue so that you cede to me the action of purchase. Digest, same title, law "If by my mandate, first response". Therefore, briefly, the direct action of mandate competes against him who accepted the mandate to fulfill it when he could not be compelled otherwise, for he who accepts a mandate is held as far as it was in the interest of the mandator that the thing which was mandated be done. And again, for the mandatary himself who accepted the mandate, there competes the contrary action of mandate for expenses, if he made any by reason of the accepted mandate, if he did not excel the limits of the mandate. But if he exceeded the mandate, he will not recover the expenses made by such an action.

¶ Negatory action

Seek above "Confessory action".

¶ Action for the management of business

It is twofold, namely direct and contrary. Whence, the direct action for the management of business is that by which the owner of the managed thing sues against him who managed his business, so that he may render an account of the administration; for example, if I were absent and my affairs began to be neglected and were faring badly, and you, seeing this, without a mandate received from me, out of concern for me and out of the friendship which you have for me, managed my affairs, this direct action for the management of business is given to me so that you render an account of the administration to me. As in Digest, On the management of business, law 2, and Institutes, On obligations which arise from quasi-contract, law 1, and paragraph "Just as".