Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
26
toconducthisaffairspersonally.However,withgrowingcommerce,intensifiedcommu-
nicationandrisingnumberoftransactionswithforeigners,theseformsbecametoocum-
bersomeandthenewtypeofcontractswaslegallysanctioned.Theyrequiredonlythe
consensusoftheparties3andasadirectconsequenceitwaspossibletoconcludethem
interabsentes.Thepartiesweregivenmuchgreaterfreedomastheycoulduseletters
ormessengerstotransmittheirintentiontocreateacontract.Theycouldentercontracts
withpersonsacrosstheseasatthesametimedealingwiththeirbusinessaffairsinRome
orsomewhereelseinItaly,andviceversa,consideringtheintensivecommercialactivity
intheprovincesandonthebordersoftheempire4.
Thesignificanceofthisnewpossibility,toconcludecontractsinterabsentes,isclear-
lydiscerniblefromthesourceswhereitisrepeatedlyemphasizedasaprominentfeature
ofconsensualcontracts.GaiusstressedthisfactinhisInstitutes:
Gai2,136.Ideoautemistismodisconsensudicimusobligationescontrahi,quianequeverborum
nequescripturaeullaproprietasdesideratur,sedsufficiteosquinegotiumgeruntconsensisse.Unde
interabsentesquoquetalianegotiacontrahuntur,veluti,perepistulamautperinternuntium;cum
alioquinverborumobligatiointerabsentesnonpossit5.
FollowingtheenumerationofconsensualcontractsGaiusfirstexplainedthereason
fortheirname,theabsenceofanyformalrequirements.Contrarytoverbalandliteral
contracts,intheirformationthereisnodutytoobserveverbalorwrittenformalities.The
agreementbetweenthepartiesontheobjectofcontractandtheirobligationsistheonly
givenconditionfortheirexistence.Fromthis,asGaius,sargumentationcanbefollowed,
flowsthepossibilitytoconcludeconsensualcontractsinterabsentes,asadifferenceto
verbalstipulatiowherethemerenatureofusedformdemandsthesimultaneouspresence
ofbothparties.
ThistextwastakeninsimilarcapacityalsoinDigest,D.44,7,2,2asageneralpre-
cept.Morespecifically,thepossibilitytocreateacontractbetweenabsenteesfollowed
byaphrasepernuntiumvel/etperepistulamisreferredtoinDigestalsobyPaulusin
sullastipulatio,Camerino1989;N.CochRuora,Laformaestipulatoria.Unaaproximaciónalestudiodel
lenguajedirectoenelDigesto,Girona2005.
3
Ontheproblemofconsensus,itsmeaningandroleinRomancontractualsystemthereisanabundance
ofliterature.Fromthese,regardingthelimitationsofspace,wecouldonlypointtofewwhichalsocontain
referencestonumerousotherworks.Cf.A.Magdelain,Leconsensualismedansl’éditdupréteur,Paris1958;
S.E.Wunner,Contractus.SeinWortgebrauchundWillensgehaltimklassischenrömischenRecht,Köln–Graz
1964,p.95sqq.;C.A.Cannata,Ladistinctiore–verbis–litteris–consensuetlesproblèmesdelapratique
[in:]SeinundWerdenimRecht,FestschriftfürUlrichvonLübtow,Berlin1970,p.431sqq.;G.Diosdy,Con-
tractinRomanLaw,Budapest1981;K.P.Nanz,DieDieEntstehungdesallgemeinenVertragsbegriffsim16.
bis18.Jahrhundert,München1985,p.7sqq.;C.Cascione,Consensus,p.161sqq.,p.399sqq.;A.Burdese,
Ilcontrattoromanotraforma,consensoecausa[in:]Ledottrinedelcontrattonellagiurisprudenzaromana,
Padova2006;M.J.Schermeier,AnachronistischeBegriffeoder:,Nichtrömisches’imRömischenIrrtumsrecht
[in:]Autourdudroitdescontrats,Genève–Zurich–Bâle2009,p.49sqq.
4
Forexamplecf.M.Rostovtzeff,CaravanCities,Oxford1932;G.K.Young,Rome’seasterntrade:
internationalcommerceandimperialpolicy,31BC–AD305,London2001;F.Millar,Rome,theGreekWorld,
andtheEast,vol.3:TheGreekWorld,theJews,andtheEast,ChapelHill2006,p.275sqq.
5
CorrespondingtextisalsofoundinJustinian,sInstitutes:I.3,22,2.Cf.C.Cascione,Consensus,438
sqq.;B.Schmidlin,DasNominatprinzipundseineErweiterungdurchdieactiopraescriptisverbis–zum
aktionenrechtlichenAufbauderrömischenKonsensualverträge,ZSS,Bd.124:2007,p.58sqq.
