Illegal Consideration

A contract induced by an illegal consideration (injusta or turpis causa) was not enforceable, even though the thing promised was itself lawful. The illegality of the consideration could be pleaded as a defense (Hunter, 598).

.

Mandatary as Agent

A mandatary was bound to give up to his mandator all rights acquired against third persons by the performance of the mandate, and permit the mandator to sue in his name. The mandatary made the contract in his own name, and the mandator would sue thereon in the name of the mandatary, and in this round about way the function of an agent was served by the mandatary. (As to agency, see generally. Hunter, 609-626; Sohm, 219-224.)
Read more

Rights and Duties of Parties

It was the duty of the landlord (locator) to deliver the property to the tenant (conductor) and to permit him to keep it for the time agreed upon. If the tenant was deprived of the property before the termination of his lease in consequence of the landlord's fault, the latter had to pay him full compensation (id quod interest). But if the landlord was not in fault, the tenant was entitled only to a remission of the rent. Thus, if a farm let to a tenant was confiscated, or a house burned, the tenant was entitled simply to remission of the rent. So in case of a chattel, if it was carried off by robbers, the hirer was released from payment for the unexpired term of the contract. If the lessor of a house determined to pull it down and rebuild it during the term, he had to pay the lessee compensation if the rebuilding was unnecessary, but if necessary, he was required simply to allow a remission of the rent. The landlord was also required to keep the property in good order...
Read more

Modes of Arrogation

There were two forms of arrogation, both public in character, (a) The ancient form, which required a preliminary investigation by the pontiffs and a decree of the comitia curiata. The adoption of a person sui juris (himself, if a male, a paterfmndHas) involved the extinction of a paternal power, which was regarded as a matter of public concern. Hence the public character of the act by which the adoption was effected. And no one could be arrogated who was not eligible to membership in the comitia, and so able to give his consent in the curiata. Hence, no woman, peregrinus, slave or (originally) person under puberty could be arrogated. The arrogator must be married and over sixty years of age, unless because of ill health or other reason he would probably die childless. And since the object of arrogation was simply to supply an heir, only a man without legitimate child could arrogate, and he could not arrogate more than one person. This mode of arrogation continued in ...
Read more