TY - JOUR
T1 - Frisii cur dicant opbinden? Dierschade in de Friese Landsordonnantie
AU - de Jong, H.
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - In case someone else's cattle damaged a field, in the law of the province of Friesland as in the Republic of the United Netherlands, art. 2,3,3 of the general provincial statute (the 'Landsordonnantie', L.O.) overrides the Roman rule of D. 9,2,39,1. Art. 2,3,3 L.O. (both of 1602 and 1723) allows those who suffer damage to retain (opbinden) this cattle until their owner has compensated the caused damage, contrary to Roman law which forbids inclusion. In the handwritten comments to art. 2,3,3 L.O., the juridical meaning of the term opbinden is explained. According to the manuscript 'Saeckma' opbinden should not be interpreted as a lien, but has the function to allow to feed the cattle. The other manuscripts, on the other hand, indeed interpret opbinden as a lien. The legal works on agrarian law also follow this interpretation and elaborate it moreover in a comparative way. Where Gerhard Feltman and Paulus Cornelis Hoynck van Papendrecht point to a mere Frisian custom as explanation for the opbinden, Christiaan Hendrik Trotz tries to give reasons for opbinden as something specific Frisian.
AB - In case someone else's cattle damaged a field, in the law of the province of Friesland as in the Republic of the United Netherlands, art. 2,3,3 of the general provincial statute (the 'Landsordonnantie', L.O.) overrides the Roman rule of D. 9,2,39,1. Art. 2,3,3 L.O. (both of 1602 and 1723) allows those who suffer damage to retain (opbinden) this cattle until their owner has compensated the caused damage, contrary to Roman law which forbids inclusion. In the handwritten comments to art. 2,3,3 L.O., the juridical meaning of the term opbinden is explained. According to the manuscript 'Saeckma' opbinden should not be interpreted as a lien, but has the function to allow to feed the cattle. The other manuscripts, on the other hand, indeed interpret opbinden as a lien. The legal works on agrarian law also follow this interpretation and elaborate it moreover in a comparative way. Where Gerhard Feltman and Paulus Cornelis Hoynck van Papendrecht point to a mere Frisian custom as explanation for the opbinden, Christiaan Hendrik Trotz tries to give reasons for opbinden as something specific Frisian.
U2 - 10.1163/15718190-08312P08
DO - 10.1163/15718190-08312P08
M3 - Article
SN - 0040-7585
VL - 83
SP - 145
EP - 178
JO - Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis
JF - Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis
ER -