Ford
The furtum ( Latin for 'theft') is a tort obligation under Roman law . Defined by actio furti as Pönalklage asserted.
requirements
The furtum cannot be adequately compared with the theft of modern understanding. Originally it comprised any kind of willful, criminal removal of property with self-interest:
“Furtum est contrectatio rei fraudulosa lucri faciendi gratia velipsius rei vel etiam usus eius possessionisve. Quod lege naturali prohibitum est admittere. "
“Theft is any dishonest touching with a profitable intention, be it of the thing itself or be it of use or possession. This is forbidden by a natural law. "
The offense thus also includes facts which, according to current German law, include theft , robbery , embezzlement (or embezzlement in Austria), unauthorized use of a vehicle and fraud (e.g. in the case of the use of incorrect weights or the theft of documents) Find equivalents. In addition, the furtum was also applicable if the behavior is not at all punishable by today's standards: For example, in the case of a contractual or illegal use of an item.
history
Basis for the development of the entire law of furtums are the Twelve Tables law . Similar to Germanic rights (cf. Gerüfte ), these differentiate according to whether the defendant was apprehended on the day of the offense or whether the stolen property was found during a house search ( quaestio lance et licio ) immediately following the offense . If this was the case, there was a furtum manifestum ; the fur manifestus ('thief caught in the act') was brought before the magistrate , whipped and then placed under the control of the private prosecutor. He had the option of killing the thief or selling him as a slave ( trans tiberim ). If the thief even acted at night, or if he tried to get hold of the prey by force of arms, or to resist arrest, he could be killed on the spot if the neighbors were called as witnesses immediately afterwards. If the thief was not caught red-handed, the only way for the robber to obtain a fine was twice the value of the item.
The distinction between fur manifestus and fur nec manifestus survived into classical and late classical Roman law, with the difference that in classical times the fur manifestus was only punished with four times (quadruplum) the value of the stolen object. In the high and late classical period, the offense of the furtum was restricted by the formation of other special norms, so that not all acts of unauthorized deprivation of property were subsumed under the furtum .
Rapina (Latin for 'robbery') has been treated as a qualified case of furtum since classical times . Here, foreign objects were taken away by force or by threats.
literature
- Heinrich Honsell : Roman law . 6th edition. Springer, Berlin / Heidelberg / New York 2006, ISBN 978-3-540-28118-4 , § 59 theft (furtum).
- Max Kaser : Roman private law . 2nd Edition. CH Beck, Munich / Würzburg 1971, ISBN 3-406-01406-2 , §§ 32, 39, 40, 143 deprivation of property (furtum) and related offenses.
- Max Kaser, Karl Hackl: The Roman civil procedure law . 2. Completely revised and expanded edition. CH Beck, Munich / Nördlingen / Reutlingen 1996, ISBN 3-406-40490-1 , §§ 3, 5, 18, 19.