Mosaycarum et Romanarum legum collatio

TITVLVS II.

VLPIANVS in the 19th book to the edict, under the title, "If he confesses that a man was killed by injury," for a simple sum. And when he said: We shall certainly accept "having broken" original: "RVPISSE" as someone who has wounded, or who strikes with rods, or lashes, or fists, or who strikes the body of a man with a weapon or another kind of object, or who has caused a swelling, or at least only if damage has been given. Otherwise, if he has not made the slave cheaper or worse in any value, the Aquilian law ceases, and it must be acted upon by way of injuries. Therefore, even if the slave has not been made worse in value, but expenses have been incurred for his safety and health, it seems to me that one cannot sue for this under the Aquilian law.

PAVLVS in his single book and title "On Injuries." GENERALLY, an injury is said to be everything that is done unlawfully. Specifically, there is another kind, which is contumelia insult/affront, which the Greeks call ΑΔΙΚΙΑΝ injustice. For when our Praetor pronounces against us, we say we have received an injury. Hence it appears that what Labeo thought is not true, that an injury among the Praetors signifies only YBPIN outrage/insolence. For it is common to all law that what is always done against good morals, and it is in someone's interest that this not be done. This edict pertains to that injury which is done for the sake of an insult.