Praeside Deo Optimo Maximo: Ex decreto et authoritate amplissimi Iurisconsultorum Collegii in inclyta Basiliensium Academia, pro solenni Docturae gradu in utroque Iure consequendo, subsequentes de litis contestatione Theses

it is considered whether nullity is being introduced into the judgment principally or incidentally.

XLI.
In the first case, if the nullity is notorious, the contestation of a suit litis contestatio: the formal establishment of the issues to be decided in a trial is not required; it is otherwise if it requires a deeper investigation. In the latter, however, it is not demanded, but since it is made in a case of appeal, it is extended to it as an accessory.

XLII.
But today, in the court of the Chamber, one can pronounce upon notorious nullity indiscriminately before the contestation of a suit, as is provided in the Ordinance of the Chamber, part 3, title 33, § 2. Note Andrew Gail, Practical Observations, book 1, observation 77.

XLIII.
In summary causes, unless the Emperor or the Pope has committed the cause to someone to be disputed simply and plainly, the contestation of a suit is necessary.

XLIIII.
The form of the contestation of a suit is varied due to the passage of time. Under ancient law, it took place through a narrative given by both litigants in the presence of witnesses, as Macrobius testifies.

XLV.
Today, a suit is properly contested if the defendant responds directly to the petition of the plaintiff. For, as Pope Gregory says, the contestation of a suit is made not through positions and responses, but through the petition proposed in court and the response that follows.

XLVI.
Even though some interpreters want a suit to be contested if the defendant says that he neither denies nor admits what the plaintiff has narrated, the more learned pragmatists legal practitioners rightly reclaim against them.

XLVII.
For just as he who, when questioned by the judge, answers nothing, is sued for the full amount on account of contumacy willful disobedience: