... Pro consequendis in u.i. doctoralibus insigniis & privilegiis ... subsequentes LXXXVI. theses de interdictis cum octo parergis

LXXVII.
Since it has been said that the spoiler must restore the fruits, it must be seen how the fruits are to be restored in a petitory as well as a possessory judgment.

LXXVIII.
Therefore, in the first place, a possessor in good faith makes his own not only natural fruits, but also industrial and civil ones; so that, unless they exist, he is not strictly convened regarding them. For those existing, as if they were the thing itself, must be sought specifically before the contestation of the lawsuit; but after the contestation, they pertain to the office of the judge.

LXXIX.
We say that this proceeds, having applied the file a metaphor for refinement or legal adjustment, contrary to the common opinion of the Doctors: that if he has become enriched even from natural fruits that have been consumed, he shall restore insofar as he has been enriched.

LXXX.
These things are true for a possessor in good faith if he has a just and valid title; for if he has an invalid one, or one that is not considered a title, he is bound to restore only natural ones.

LXXXI.
Hence arises a question, involved in so many and such great opinions of the Doctors, that some do not hesitate to fearlessly concede an antinomy a contradiction between two laws or principles of the law: Does a possessor in good faith cease to make fruits his own due to a supervening bad faith? We fearlessly conclude that he does not make them his own, without any legal antinomy.

LXXXII.
A possessor in bad faith restores all, both those that were perceived and those that could have been perceived; that is, those that a most diligent father of a family would have perceived.

LXXXIII.
Often, however, fruits are compensated with expenses and improvements. For if he is a possessor in bad faith, he deducts necessary expenses not by an exception of deceit, but by the office of the judge.