Povreda tela i nadoknada štete u starom Rimu

Abstract

Članak ispituje granice između delikata iniuria i damnum iniuria datum, kroz jezičko, sistemsko i istorijsko tumačenje odlomaka D.9.2.5.3, D.9.2.7.pr, D.19.2.13.4, D.9.2.27.17 i Coll. 2.4.1 i njihovu interpolacionističku analizu. Autor pokušava da odgovori na tri pitanja. Prvo, da li su imovinske posledice telesnih povreda bile uključene u pojam damnum iniuria datum pre Justinijanove reforme? Drugo, koja tužba se koristila za nadoknadu te štete, ukoliko to nije bila actio legis Aquiliae (utilis)? Najzad, ukoliko su Justinijanovi kompilatori proširili pojam damnum i na troškove lečenja i izgubljenu zaradu zbog nesposobnosti za rad, šta ih je navelo da izvedu takvu reformu?.

This paper examines the boundaries between two Roman delicts, iniuria and damnum iniuria datum, through linguistic, systematic and historical interpretation and interpolative analysis of the following texts: D.9.2.5.3, D.9.2.7.pr, D.19.2.13.4, D.9.2.27.17 and Coll. 2.4.1. The author is trying to answer three questions. Firstly, were the financial consequences of bodily injuries included in the term damnum iniuria datum before the Justinian’s reform? Secondly, which action was used for exacting damages in such cases, if it was not actio legis Aquiliae (utilis)? Finally, if Justinian’s compilers included financial consequences of bodily injuries into damnum iniuria datum, what prompted them to carry out such a reform?.