The paper aims to demostrate a change in the jurisprudential interpretation of the rules of the XII tables about the killing of the thief. In archaic law, the self-defense was allowed on the objective basis of a theft committed during the night, or during the day by an armed thief. The influence of the lex Aquilia, and particularly of the subjective idea of iniuria – identified with dolus or culpa – led the jurists to admit the self-defense only when the victim subjectively felt an imminent danger.
L’uccisione del fur nocturnus e diurnus qui se telo defendit tra norma e interpretatio
CURSI, MARIA FLORIANA
2016-01-01
Abstract
The paper aims to demostrate a change in the jurisprudential interpretation of the rules of the XII tables about the killing of the thief. In archaic law, the self-defense was allowed on the objective basis of a theft committed during the night, or during the day by an armed thief. The influence of the lex Aquilia, and particularly of the subjective idea of iniuria – identified with dolus or culpa – led the jurists to admit the self-defense only when the victim subjectively felt an imminent danger.File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.