Acceso usuarios
Martin Laborenz
Most of the exegeses conducted on the antinomy Jul. 13 dig., D. 41.1.36 -Ulp. 7 disp., D. 12.1.18 pr. are obviously led by the aim to confirrn the respective theory of iusta causa traditionis held by the author. For instance, the prevailing opinion imputes to lulian the justification of the transfer of ownership by a loan agreement , applying the principle "in maiore minus inest". In different ways, but with the same intention , Cannata, Flume, Schanbacher, and Harke, amongst others, recently attempted to declare lulian to be an exponent of a causal "traditio". These theories seem to have in common the negligence of the fragment's wording: lulian emphasizes the existence of a "dissensus in causa" twice, whilst mentioning exclusively the "consensus in corpore" as reason for the transfer of ownership. Thus, the pattern of a homogeneous opinion in classical Roman Iaw, in terrns of the causal principle like it is preferred today, cannot be convincingly founded in the antinomy
