Chapter Summary
Roman law had a law of delicts rather than a law of delict. In other words, in principle, an injured party had to fit his or her claim into some specific category of recognised wrong, rather than relying on a general principle requiring compensation for loss caused by wrongdoing.
In this chapter, we have focused on liability for damage to property, imposed by the lex Aquilia. Although the specific rules of the lex Aquilia were generally not received into later law, the Roman jurists' discussion of issues of principle, such as the concepts of fault and causation, has had an influence that is still felt in modern law.Further Reading
G.3.182, 210-19
J.4.1pr, 4.3
D.9.2; 47.1
C.3.35
P Birks, The Roman Law of Obligations (E Descheemaeker ed, Oxford University Press 2014) chapter 9
B W Frier, A Casebook on the Roman Law of Delict (Scholars Press 1989)
H MacQueen and W D H Sellar, ‘Negligence’ in R Zimmermann and K Reid eds, A History of Private Law in Scotland, Volume II: Obligations (Oxford University Press 2000)
E Metzger ed, A Companion to Justinian’s Institutes (Duckworth 1998) 174-5, 184-92 P J du Plessis ed, Wrongful Damage to Property in Roman Law: British Perspectives
(Edinburgh University Press 2017)
A Watson, The Law of Obligations in the Later Roman Republic (Oxford University Press 1965) chapter 16
R Zimmermann, The Law of Obligations: Roman Foundations of the Civilian Tradition (Oxford University Press 1996) chapters 29 and 30