This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.

...cannot be defended; nevertheless, we judge that this does not prejudice the surety.
It is also reasonable that this should apply to a surety, even one acting for the debtor himself (provided it is by the mandate of the woman).
But, however much these things may be so, yet a woman giving or paying by no means enjoys this benefit.
Nor can she claim it by releasing a pledge, even to a husband who is insolvent.
However, if, being ignorant of the aid of the Senatusconsultum, she should pay, she shall have the condictio indebiti [action for recovery of payment not due].
A woman also, who deceives a creditor by lying, implores the benefit of the law in vain (since it assists her weakness, not her cunning).
We understand this to occur, however, when she herself knows she is not bound, but the creditor is ignorant of it.
Therefore, this has been rightly established, for no one ought to derive profit from their own deceit.