Henrik-Riko Held

Autor analizira pravni okvir za različite slučajeve oduzimanja imovine koji su se dogodili tijekom vojnoga postupanja protiv Zrinskog i Frankopana te vezano uz opću konfiskaciju njihove imovine u kontekstu zločina uvrede veličanstva (crimen laesae Maiestatis) za koji su bili optuženi te naposljetku i osuđeni. Središnji problem vezan je uz okolnost da je konfiskacija najprije bila određena u carskoj proskripciji, tj. kraljevskom proglasu protiv Zrinskog i njegovih suradnika krajem ožujka 1670., te da je uskoro bila i provedena, a da se ujedno tražila u postupku protiv njih (studeni 1670. – travanj 1671.) te naposljetku bila i određena u presudi. U tom smislu kao pravni problem ističe se pitanje kada točno nastupa pravni učinak konfiskacije kod zločina uvrede veličanstva u rimskoj pravnoj tradiciji – već samim počinjenjem djela ili tek donošenjem presude. U analizi se najprije na temelju postojećih izvora iznosi kronologija najvažnijih događaja vezanih uz oduzimanje imovine. Zatim se prostor posvećuje argumentaciji obrane i optužbe u postupku protiv Zrinskog i Frankopana u odgovarajućim procesnim spisima. Posebna pozornost daje se problemu pravne osnove za konfiskaciju te se analizira konfiskacija imovine u kontekstu zločina uvrede veličanstva u rimskom pravu i rimskoj pravnoj tradiciji (osobito u kontekstu prava primjenjivog u postupku protiv Zrinskog i Frankopana). S druge strane analizira se problematika pravnoga uređenja oduzimanja imovine pobunjenicima u okviru tada važećega prava naroda (ius gentium). Naposljetku se razlažu mogući uzroci kumuliranja
pravnih osnova konfiskacije imovine u ovom slučaju.

//

This paper analyses the legal framework of property confiscation during the military campaign against Zrinski and Frankopan, and the criminal proceedings against them for high treason (crimen laese Maiestatis), for which they were ultimately executed. Confiscation of their property was initially ordered through an imperial proscription and royal proclamation at the end of March 1670, and was promptly undertaken. However, confiscation was further demanded during the trial (November 1670 – April 1671). Therefore, the main issue addressed here is determining the moment at which confiscation occurs in the context of crimen laese Maiestatis in Roman legal tradition – whether it happens when the crime is committed or after the sentence is delivered in the criminal proceedings. The analysis begins by establishing a general chronology based on extant sources. Following this, the argumentation of the defence and prosecution in the criminal proceedings against Zrinski and Frankopan is addressed. Legal grounds for the confiscation are particularly analysed regarding the notion of crimen laese Maiestatis in Roman law and Roman legal tradition, with special attention to the laws applicable during the proceedings against Zrinski and Frankopan. The seizure of rebels’ property from the perspective of the then applicable ius gentium is also addressed. Finally, possible reasons for the cumulation of various legal grounds for the confiscation of property in this case are discussed.

U skladu s relevantnošću teme za znanstvenu i opću publiku, obljetnice pogubljenja dvojice hrvatskih velikaša i inače su redovito bile popraćene izdanjima izvorne građe ili pak znanstvenim elaboracijama nekih nadovezanih tema. Tu se posebice ističe izdanje isprava o Zrinsko-frankopanskoj uroti koje je o dvjestotoj obljetnici pogubljenja Zrinskog i Frankopana skupio i objavio tadašnji predsjednik JAZU-a, akademik Franjo Rački. U povodu tristopedesete obljetnice u izdanju Zaklade Marija i Mirjan Damaška i Školske knjige objavljeno je i ovo djelo. U osnovi, riječ je o skupljenim i sistematiziranim dokumentima koji se odnose upravo na kazneni postupak protiv Zrinskog i Frankopana, prevedenima na hrvatski jezik.
Kako je navedeno na naslovnici, djelo je nastalo prema ideji Mirjana Damaške (Sterling Professor emeritus, Yale University), akademika (HAZU, Razred za društvene znanosti i American Academy of Arts and Sciences) te općenito velikog pravnika i znanstvenika, kao i dobročinitelja pravne znanosti i Pravnog fakulteta u Zagrebu, koji je njegova alma mater. Iako je vrhunac karijere doživio u Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama, kako sam kaže “domovini koja ga je posvojila”, nikad nije zaboravio svoju “jedinu i istinsku domovinu” i naš Pravni fakultet, te ih je uvijek bio spreman pomagati na najrazličitije načine. Jedan od tih načina je i djelovanje Zaklade Marija i Mirjan Damaška, nazvane po njegovoj preminuloj supruzi, koja ima sjedište na Pravnom fakultetu u Zagrebu i prvi je projekt financiran iz njezinih sredstava upravo objava ovog izdanja. Mirjan Damaška je i autor dviju uvodnih studija.
Samo sadržajno uređivanje izdanja te obradba i prijevod izvorne građe povjereni su redom najvećim stručnjakinjama u odgovarajućim područjima, kako i priliči izdanju ovakve važnosti. Urednica knjige i koordinatorica rada na izvorima u svim fazama nastanka ovog vrijednog djela je akademkinja Nella Lonza (HAZU, Razred za društvene znanosti), velika i svjetski priznata stručnjakinja za srednjovjekovnu i novovjekovnu pravnu povijest, koja je ujedno i prevodila izvore s talijanskog jezika. Za građu na njemačkom jeziku bila je zadužena dr. sc. Ivana Horbec, članica suradnica HAZU-a (Razred za društvene znanosti) i viša znanstvena suradnica na Hrvatskom institutu za povijest, a za latinski je jezik bila zadužena dr. sc. Maja Matasović, izvanredna profesorica na Sveučilištu u Zagrebu, Fakultetu hrvatskih studija (Odsjek za hrvatski latinitet).

This paper explores testamentary law in late medieval Dubrovnik (Ragusa) by analysing the testaments made by notary Thomasinus de Savere, working at Dubrovnik, 1277–1286. De Savere was an educated notary, originating from Reggio Emilia in Italy. He greatly contributed to the spread of doctrinal elements of ius commune in Dubrovnik. In determining the reach of his influence on testamentary law, I will first examine inheritance law in Dubrovnik at the time, followed by an analysis of the testaments De Savere composed for the local population. I will then compare these testaments with the testament De Savere made for himself (1284). The latter differs from the testaments composed for the locals, as it is doctrinally in line with the latest developments of the ius commune. I will discuss the possible reasons and relevance of this difference.

The first issue of the International Memorial Course Marko Petrak – Roman Legal Tradition and Contemporary Legal Systems, organised by the Faculty of Law in Zagreb, was held at the Inter-University Centre in Dubrovnik from the 16th to 18th of October 2023. The course was organised in honour and memory of eminent professor and scholar, the late lamented Marko Petrak. The course was planned by the co-directors from different European universities (University of Zagreb; University of Trento; University of Warsaw; Jagiellonian University, Kraków; Autonomous University of Barcelona; University of Sarajevo), while the main organisers from the Faculty of Law in Zagreb were Professor Tomislav Karlović and Associate Professor Henrik-Riko Held. The course was attended by forty participants: students from various European countries (Slovenia, Poland, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Italy, etc.) and eminent professors and scholars from various distinguished European universities and institutions (e.g. Trento, Torino, Ferrara, Macerata, Frankfurt am Main, Kraków, Warsaw, Ljubljana, etc.). The organizers and the participants were also joined by Marko Petrak’s mother, Professor Jelka Petrak (Faculty of Medicine, University of Zagreb). During the course various topics were covered in three thematic blocks: Roman Legal Tradition, Methodology and Teaching of Roman Law in Contemporary World (first day), Roman Legal Issues (first and second day) and Medieval and Canon Law Contributions to the Roman Legal Tradition and vice versa (third day).

Res sacrae are part of a well-known classification of res in Roman law. Originally they consisted of objects (land, temples, altars etc.) dedicated to the dii superi, or celestial gods, but in time they became associated with Christian worship as well. They are most famously defined in Gaius’ and Justinian’s Institutes (Gai. Inst. 2, 4 and Iust. Inst. 2, 1).  In basic terms, the crux of the matter lies in the manner in which an object may become a res sacra and in the particular rules regarding its administration, as well as the regulation of its special position in the legal system, i.e. the restriction or outright prohibition of it being subject to a legal transaction or regular means of acquiring ownership. These matters have recently been extensively dealt with in literature.
However, both terminologically and conceptually the importance of res sacrae stretches beyond the confines of the Roman law proper. The concept is relevant historically and contemporarily in canon law as well, and it was and is used in legal systems steeped in Roman legal tradition up to the present day. Res sacrae in canon law are objects that have been designated for divine worship with a dedication or blessing (for example, churches, confessionals, crosses, chalices and patens, bells, holy water etc.), which excludes a possibility of a profane or inappropriate use, even if they are owned by private persons.  Canon law further addresses different matters, such as the prohibition of sale of sacred relics (can. 1190 CIC), prohibition for a sacred object belonging to an ecclesiastical juridic person to be acquired by a private person via prescription (can. 1269 CIC) or a penalty for the profanation of a sacred object (can. 1376 CIC).
The Roman and canonical concept of res sacrae had such an influence throughout history that protection and special regulation thereof is a well-known and widely accepted principle in numerous contemporary legal systems. To take only examples which explicitly use the expression res sacrae in pertinent literature, German, Italian and Scots law stand out.  This means that a concept stemming from the Romano-canonical legal tradition has permeated contemporary legal systems and exists both in the legislation and in legal discourse.
Furthermore, contemporary concordatarian law (ius concordatarium), in other words international treaty law regulating relations between the Holy See and sovereign states and legal status of the Catholic Church, sometimes allows for an application of certain elements of canon law in secular legal systems (for example, when ecclesiastical property is involved). In an admittedly minor but nevertheless illustrative example of Croatia, the Treaties with the Holy See prescribe exactly that regarding the canonical res sacrae, thus adding further restrictions and protections in their regard alongside those already extant in the secular legal order.  In that way both historical influence of Roman law and canon law, as well as the present-day influence of canon law (in itself partly shaped by Roman law) allowed by concordatarian law impact contemporary legal systems.
Essentially, the matter at hand concerns a religious concept having a certain influence on legal order and creating pertinent repercussions. The main issue is the establishment, administration and termination of an object being sacred throughout history. Relationship between different pagan and Christian religious matters in the first centuries of Christianity has been dealt with in literature,  as well as the issue of general differences between the Roman and Christian concept of res sacrae.  The shift in the Roman imperial legislation from addressing pagan to addressing Christian worship in the context of res sacrae, along with the changes of the pertinent regulation, has also been addressed.
However, the aim of this paper is to particularly analyse the concept of a sacred object from the perspective of canon law throughout its history up until the present moment. The analysis would thus start with trying to determine the concept of a sacred object in early canon law, i.e. in the period when Roman law did not yet permeate it. Afterwards it would deal with the sources of canon law which were to a significant degree influenced by Roman law and its scholarly development in ius commune. It would continue through the periods in which mutual influence of canon and civil law on one another existed. In that way the analysis may help to ascertain in which measure did the original Roman concept of res sacrae influence the corresponding canonical concept, and the other way around, or in which measure did the Christian and early canonical concept of a sacred object change the Roman template, albeit while being subsumed under it terminologically and retaining a similar regulatory framework. Finally, the analysis would deal with the influence of such an amalgamated concept of res sacrae in Romano-canonical legal tradition and in contemporary context. In that way the analysis would deal with vicissitudes of res sacrae which have made a full circle, both from the ancient Roman pagan religion to Christianity and Catholicism, and from Roman law to contemporary legal systems.

U poglavlju se analiziraju takozvani verzijski zahtjevi hrvatskog prava iz perspektive rimskog prava i rimske pravne tradicije. Riječ je o zahtjevima iz čl. 1118.-1120. Zakona o obveznim odnosima (ZOO), kao i njima srodnim čl. 287. Obiteljskog zakona te čl. 1125. ZOO-a. Najprije se analizira actio de in rem verso u rimskom pravu te razvoj verzijskih zahtjeva u njegovoj naknadnoj obradi i recepciji. Predmet analize je i verzijski zahtjev u poredbenom pravu, i to austrijskom i francuskom pravu kao i njima srodnim pravnim sustavima. U kontekstu hrvatskog prava najprije se analizira povijest kodifikacije verzijskih zahtjeva u ZOO-u te najvažniji stavovi s njima u vezi u teoriji. Posebna pažnja posvećuje se sudskoj praksi u području takozvanih verzijskih zahtjeva te se analizira njihova terminološka prisutnost u domaćem pravu kao i različiti primjeri njihove primjene. Pokušava se razjasniti problem njihovog odnosa sa srodnim imovinskopravnim zahtjevima (reivindikacijskim zahtjevom te zahtjevom iz obveznopravne odgovornosti za štetu). Naposljetku se vrednuje prisutnost koncepta rimske actio de in rem verso i njezinih naknadnih varijacija u suvremenom hrvatskom pravu.

//

The author analyses actio de in rem verso or actions associated with it in the Croatian law, from the perspective of the Roman law and the Roman legal tradition. That action can be associated with Arts 1118 – 1120 and 1125 of the Croatian Obligations Act (Zakon o obveznim odnosima), as well as with Art 287 of the Family Act (Obiteljski zakon). The starting point is actio de in rem verso in the Roman law and its development within the Roman legal tradition. Afterwards, actio de in rem verso and its variants in comparative law are analysed, more precisely in the Austrian and the French law and the related systems. Firstly, the history of codification of actio de in rem verso and its variants in the Croatian law is analysed within the context of the Croatian law. The analysis subsequently deals with the most important opinions in theory. A special attention is given to the case law associated with the action and different instances of its application in practice. The author clarifies the relationship between the so-called actio de in rem verso and other closely related actions (such as rei vindicatio or action in tort). Finally, the presence and relevance of the Roman actio de in rem verso and its later variants in the Croatian law is evaluated.

Author analyses cessio, or transfer of obligation from one creditor to another as a transaction pertaining to Roman law and Roman legal tradition, in the documents of Thomasinus de Savere, a late 13th century notary in Dubrovnik (Ragusa). First he analyses cessio in doctrine and early notaries’ formularies of the 13th century as a conceptual background of the analysis. After a short historical context, documents are specifically analysed. Cessiones are approached from a threefold perspective, first generally in comparison with other documents, and then regarding their structure and contents.

//

L'autore analizza cessio, o il trasferimento dell'obbligazione da un creditore all'altro come transazione pertinente al diritto romano e alla tradizione giuridica romana, nei documenti di Tomasino de Savere, un notaio della fine del XIII secolo a Dubrovnik (Ragusa). Prima analizza il cessio nella dottrina e nei formulari dei primi notai del XIII secolo. Dopo un breve contesto storico, i documenti sono specificamente analizzati. Cessiones sono analizzati da una triplice prospettiva, prima generalmente in confronto con altri documenti, e poi riguardo alla loro struttura e contenuto.

Autor analizira nastanak, razvoj i suvremenu primjenu načela vezanih uz utjecaj zle vjere, odnosno prestanka poštenja posjeda nastalih nakon početka posjedovanja, na dosjelost. Tako se najprije analiziraju nastanak i razvoj regule mala fides superveniens non nocet, vezane uz rimsko pravo, po kojoj naknadno stečena zla vjera ne smeta dosjedanju. Zatim se obrađuje regula mala fides superveniens nocet, čiji su nastanak i razvoj vezani uz kanonsko pravo i njegov utjecaj na svjetovne pravne sustave. Naposljetku se razrađuje stanje u suvremenim pravnim sustavima, počevši od najvažnijih europskih kodifikacija (njemačkog BGB-a i francuskog CC-a) do sustava na koje su oni utjecali. Načelno se utvrđuje snažan i neposredan utjecaj rimsko-kanonske pravne tradicije na suvremene pravne poretke u predmetnom kontekstu. Uglavnom na temelju različitih uređenja u BGB-u i CC-u, u ovom području ne postoji jednoobraznost te se u suvremenim pravnim sustavima mogu naći obje regule. Međutim, povijest kodifikacije navedenih uređenja, razrađenost u povijesnoj primjeni te najnovije analize upućuju na optimalnost načelne regule mala fides superveniens nocet, nastale u okviru rimsko-kanonske pravne tradicije.

//

The author analyses the origins, development and contemporary application of maxims associated with the influence of bad faith or mala fides occurring af ter acquiring possession on acquisitive prescription (adverse possession). The earliest origins and development of the maxim: Mala fides superveniens non nocet, which is associated with Roman law, are scrutinised. According to these, bad faith acquired af ter the beginning and in the course of acquisitive prescription did not hinder it. Af terwards, mala fides superveniens nocet, a completely different maxim associated with canon law and its influence on the civilian (secular) legal systems is analysed. Finally, the situation in contemporary legal systems is investigated, including the most important civil codes (German BGB and French CC) and systems which were influenced by these codes. In principle, a strong direct influence of the Romano-canonical legal tradition on contemporary legal systems is recognized. Mainly due to dif ferent arrangements in BGB and CC, uniformity in this aspect does not exist, and both maxims may be found in contemporary legal systems. However, history of codification of the said maxims, the elaboration of their historical application and recent tendencies indicate the optimality of the general maxim mala fides superveniens nocet, developed within the framework of the Romano-canonical legal tradition.

The author analyses bona fides, or possession in good faith, as a prerequisite of the canonical praescriptio acquisitiva and the adverse possession as set forth in contemporary Croatian law in their interrelationship. The problem stems from the fact that the Treaty between the Holy See and the Republic of Croatia on legal matters, being an international treaty and thus having precedence over Croatian laws according to the Croatian constitution, in certain circumstances allows for a direct application of canon law within the Croatian legal system. The aim of this paper is to analyse whether this also applies to bona fides in adverse possession, and if so, in which way exactly. The canonical praescriptio in the context of the Roman legal tradition is analysed first in order to clarify certain terminological and conceptual discrepancies between canon law and Croatian law in this field. Bona fides regarding usucapio and praescriptio of Roman law and the Roman legal tradition is then particularly addressed. The central part of the paper deals with canonical bona fides, where it is specifically noted that it is a stricter standard in comparison to good faith as found in Croatian law. Canon law requires positive good faith throughout the whole required prescription period, meaning knowledge or a reasonable possibility of knowledge of having a right to possess, not infringing the right of another thereby. On the other hand, Croatian law requires knowledge or possibility of knowledge at the outset, while later on only acquired knowledge will render possession illicit. In addition, the Croatian standard of good faith is conceived more simply in comparison to the twofold canonical standard, i.e. only as the absence of knowledge or possibility of knowledge of not having a right to possess. Although both systems presume good faith, those differences may prove crucial if an interested party (owner of property being prescribed) offers evidence to the contrary. Finally, our analysis of the Treaty between the Holy See and the Republic of Croatia on legal matters revealed that the canonical standard of bona fides should be applied whenever a juridical person of the Catholic Church in Croatia acquires property by means of adverse possession, but by all accounts also when any other person acquires Church property in the same way.

//

U radu se analiziraju bona fides i poštenje posjeda kao pretpostavke kanonskopravne zastare (praescriptio acquisitiva) te dosjelosti hrvatskog prava u njihovu suodnosu. Naime, djelovanjem ugovora između Svete Stolice i RH o pravnim pitanjima u određenim slučajevima vezanima uz crkvene pravne osobe i njihovu imovinu primjenjuju se odredbe kanonskog prava te je cilj rada utvrditi na koji se način to odnosi i na ovu pretpostavku. Nakon opće analize kanonskopravne zastare te pretpostavke dobre vjere kod dosjelosti u rimskoj pravnoj tradiciji zasebno se obrađuje kanonskopravna bona fides i njezine specifičnosti koje ju čine strožim standardom od poštenja posjeda hrvatskog prava. Naposljetku se zaključuje kako se kanonskopravna bona fides primjenjuje kad god crkvene pravne osobe stječu imovinu dosjelošću, a po svemu sudeći i kad se istim načinom stječe njihova imovina.

After an outline of the development of the procuratores and advocati in Roman law and Roman legal tradition, they are traced in the documents of Thomasinus de Savere, sworn-in notary public (notarius iuratus) and cancellarius (scriba) in Dubrovnik (Ragusa) from 1277 to 1286. In the central part of the analysis, data on the procuratores and advocati derived from Tomasinus’ notary practice are presented for the first time (number of documents, different functions, etc.). With regard to the procuratores, the main elements of the formula from the documents are compared to the most important formularies from the thirteenth century. The second part focuses on the advocati, who were principally elected to that post by the city authorities, but the parties apparently sometimes chose advocates different than those. In addition, a certain number of advocati were also known to act as procurators or judges, suggesting diffusion of practical legal knowledge in particular circles. Overall, the documents of the notary public Thomasinus de Savere reflected the procuratores and advocati as they were instituted in Roman law. More to the point, his documents mirrored the status of the current legal framework, slightly lagging behind the most developed cities of northern Italy, yet keeping pace with the communes of the eastern Adriatic.
//
U radu se analiziraju procuratores i advocati u zapisima Tomazina de Savere, dubrovačkog notara i kancelara 1277-1286. Riječ je o različitim oblicima zastupanja, odnosno pružanja stručne pravne pomoći iz rimskog prava s raširenom primjenom u srednjovjekovnom razdoblju. Nakon općeg prikaza prokurature i advokature u rimskom pravu i rimskoj pravnoj tradiciji daju se relevantni podaci o Tomazinovu životu i radu. U središnjem dijelu rada posebna pažnja posvećuje se formuli za imenovanje prokuratora i usporedbi s najvažnijim notarskim formularima i zapisima iz drugih gradova na istočnojadranskoj obali. Kod advokata proučena je njihova uloga u procesu te odnos s drugim pravnim zanimanjima. Najopćenitije se razmatra usklađenost analiziranih koncepata s predlošcima u rimskom pravu te tadašnjim trendovima na Mediteranu.

This contribution provides a historical-comparative analysis of the phases of certain relevant civil procedural reforms in which for a certain period of time the old and the new mode of procedure existed in parallel, with the possibility of the parties’ choice between the two. In the analysis, a threefold perspective is assumed, and the issue is approached from the perspective of Roman law, historical English common law and procedural law reforms in the lands of the Habsburg Monarchy in the 19th century. In the analysed periods, contrary to expectations, the parties disregarded the general evaluation of a new procedure’s efficiency. Instead, they were inclined to prefer the procedure that suited their immediate interests the best, even if it was generally considered to be outdated. The presence of this phenomenon throughout millennia and in disparate jurisdictions indicates the necessity to calculate its effects in scholarly and practical assessments of any given procedural reform.

In this article the author analyses the problem of the philosophical background of the condictio claims in classical Roman law from three different aspects. First he deals with the issue of the apparent origins of the philosophical principles and concepts associated with condictio claims in sources such as ius naturale, aequitas, natura, etc. After dismissing the possibility of their postclassical origin, the focus of the analysis shifts to the possible influences of certain Greek philosophical schools on them, namely the Peripatetics and the Stoics. Finally, the actual reach of such influence is discussed.

The author in this article analyses the development of the unjustified (unjust) enrichment as a general and an independent source of obligations on the basis of Roman law. Although such a concept admittedly did not exist in Roman law, certain actions therefrom were largely used in the formative period of the civil and canon law scholarship in the Middle Ages, as well as in the subsequent reception of Roman law at the courts in continental Europe. On that basis contemporary theoretical analyses and case law often use Roman legal terminology in the context of unjustified enrichment (condictio and diferent condictiones, actio de in rem verso, etc.). The aim of this analysis is to propose a contribution to a more complete and a more accurate appreciation of the connection between actions from Roman law and the formation of the concept of unjustified enrichment, and with that also their connection and relevance in a contemporary context. Accordingly, the general development in the Middle Ages is the first part of the analysis, followed by two basic different tendencies in the development. One of them is associated with the French law, where Roman actio de in rem verso had an important role in the development of the unjustified enrichment law. The other is related to the German law, which is in this respect based on Roman condictiones. Besides, the English common law and the historical Hungarian private law, or the private law of the Tripartitum in its application in the Kingdom of SHS, or the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, are also analysed as examples of the systems originally unrelated to Roman law in this regard, but experiencing strong influence later on, principally by means of systems more strongly shaped on the basis of Roman condictiones. Conclusive remarks discuss the general presence of Roman law in the development of unjustified enrichment law and in its contemporary variants, as well as the optimality of the systems more authentically based on Roman legal sources.

//Text of the article written in Croatian.//

Autor u radu analizira razvoj neopravdanog obogaćenja, odnosno stjecanja bez osnove, kao općeg i samostalnog izvora obveze. Iako takav koncept nije postojao u rimskom pravu, određene rimske tužbe uvelike su korištene u formativnom razdoblju srednjovjekovne civilistike i kanonistike, kao i u naknadnoj recepciji rimskog prava u ovom kontekstu. Na tom temelju i suvremene teorijske analize te sudska praksa nerijetko posežu za rimskom pravnom terminologijom u kontekstu neopravdanog obogaćenja (kondikcijski i verzijski zahtjevi, condictio, actio de in rem verso, itd.). Analizom se nastoji dati doprinos potpunijem i ispravnijem razumijevanju povezanosti rimskih tužbi s oblikovanjem koncepta neopravdanog obogaćenja, a samim time i njihovoj relevantnosti u suvremenom kontekstu. Radi toga najprije se obrađuje opći razvoj u srednjovjekovlju, a nakon toga dvije temeljne novovjekovne razvojne tendencije, jedna vezana za francusko pravo u kojemu je u razvoju koncepta neopravdanog obogaćenja važniju ulogu imao verzijski zahtjev (actio de in rem verso) te druga vezana za njemačko pravo, koja počiva na rimskim kondikcijskim zahtjevima (condictiones). Uz to, analiziraju se i engleski common law te ugarsko privatno pravo kao primjeri sustava koji izvorno nisu bili snažnije povezani s rimskim pravom u području koje je predmet analize, ali su se naknadno reformirali pod njegovim utjecajem, i to prvenstveno uz pomoć sustava snažnije oblikovanih na temelju rimskih kondikcijskih zahtjeva. Naposljetku se donose zaključci vezani za opću prisutnost rimskog prava u razvoju koncepta neopravdanog obogaćenja i u njegovim suvremenim inačicama te za optimalnost sustava koji autentičnije počivaju na rimskim izvorima.

The author analyses condictional claims (claims associated with condictio) in Roman law, in which turpitudo, or immorality, was involved in certain way. Firstly he analyses these claims in three different Roman procedural systems, legis actio per condictionem, condictio of the
formulary procedure and different condictiones of the postclassical and Justinianic law and cognitio extraordinaria. Afterwards, the meaning of turpitudo and turpis in Roman law is discussed. In the central part of the text the author deals specifically with the typology of the instances of ob turpem rem condicere in the sources, in other words he analyses condictio ob turpem (vel iniustam) causam from the Justinian's codification. Analysing the extant literature on the matter, finally he gives a reinterpretation regarding main functions of the ob turpem rem condicere in Roman law, while suggesting a possible explanation of its origins and its consequent relevance in the general Roman
condictional system.

//Text of the article written in Croatian.//

Autor u radu analizira kondikcijske zahtjeve u rimskom pravu u situacijama u kojima je na određeni način postojala turpitudo, odnosno nemoralnost. U tu svrhu najprije obrađuje kondikcijske zahtjeve u sva tri rimska postupovna oblika, legisakcijskom postupku per condictionem, formularnoj condictio te različitim condictiones postklasičnog i Justinijanovog prava u kognicijskom, odnosno ekstraordinarnom postupku. Zatim se iznosi problematika značenja koje su termini turpitudo i turpis imali u rimskom pravu. Središnji dio rada jest analiza izvora, u kojoj se autor posebno bavi tipologijom slučajeva kondiciranja ob turpem rem, odnosno analizira condictio ob turpem (vel iniustam) causam u Justinijanovoj kodifikaciji. Analizirajući literaturu o predmetnoj problematici, naposljetku daje reinterpretaciju funkcija kondiciranja ob turpem rem u rimskom pravu, uz sugeriranje mogućeg objašnjenja njenog podrijetla te posljedično položaja i važnosti u općem rimskom kondikcijskom sustavu.

In this article the author analyses procuratoris revocatio in the law of Tripartitum of Stephen Werböczy, which provided for a recall of a statement, or any procedural action made by a procurator (proctor) in the proceedings. Firstly, he gives an account of the arrangement of procuratoris revocatio in the Tripartitum and presents all the relevant
implications. Further, he outlines the main functions of procurator and advocatus in Roman law and the Roman legal tradition. After that, he deals with the possibility of recalling procedural actions made by them, specifically addressing revocatio (recall) in the context of procurators, and the rules regulating the recall of the advocate’s statements, both in Roman law and in Romano-canonical procedure. On this basis he gives a final evaluation of the relevance of the Roman legal tradition in the context of procuratoris revocatio in the law of Tripartitum. [Text of the article written in Croatian]

The author analyses the legis actio per condictionem procedure, as a basis for the development of unjustified enrichment claims (condictiones) in classical Roman law. He specifically deals with the origins of this procedure, which is still an unresolved issue in Romanist studies. He thoroughly analyses the basic characteristics of this procedure: the thirty-day time period (dies tricensimus) applied in the procedure and the usage of the terms condicere and condictio, upon which the name of this legis actio is based. Finally, he defines the terminological and conceptual interconnection of the legis actio
per condictionem procedure with the ancient Roman procedure for a declaration of war, or the bellum iustum procedure. Due to certain common features of these two procedures, the author suggests a similar level of their immersion in the ancient Roman religious and legal concepts. That way, he contributes to the understanding of the origins
of the legis actio per condictionem procedure, which in turn helps with the analysis of the unjustified enrichment claims (condictiones) in Roman law and its reception in general. [Text of the article written in Croatian]

Patrimony is one of the basic concepts of the contemporary European civil law systems. Contrary to the modern systems, in Roman law there is no single term to designate patrimony with its specific contents, but rather there is a number of different expressions for patrimony, most important of which are familia, pecunia, patrimonium and bona. Familia designates the original Roman agnate family, but also denotes objects necessary for its upkeep, such as land, foodstuffs, household objects, etc. Pecunia is derived from the word pecus, which means cattle, but it also came to designate money, and even the contents of a patrimony in general. Patrimonium refers to all the objects that belonged to the pater familias. Bona is a term for patrimony from praetorian law, and it is the most advanced concept in the context of this analysis. Generally, all of these concepts were mostly relevant in the context of inheritance and enforcement of debts. Terminologically and conceptually all of them were subject of the reception of Roman law. Consequently, contemporary concepts share certain common features with the Roman concepts. It can be generally stated that the Roman legal tradition has a significant presence in the contemporary European concepts of patrimony. This conclusion is confirmed by the accentuated usage of the concept of patrimony in the context of inheritance and enforcement of debts in contemporary legal systems, which are also the main areas of its application in Roman law. [Text of the article written in Croatian]