Num praescriptione omnia iura tolluntur?

Parisian canonists on prescription and the limitation of actions

in Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis / Revue d'Histoire du Droit / The Legal History Review
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.


Have Institutional Access?

Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?


In Paris the canonists strived at interpreting the canons on praescriptio in such a way that they concurred with Roman law. A clear and early example provides the summa Parisiensis, written in the late 1160s. Stephen of Tournai and other jurists followed its example modelling the praescriptio canonica after the longissimi temporis praescriptio in the Corpus iuris. In this line of thought praescriptio firstly denotes a defence of limitation. In Bologna, by requiring continuous good faith and a title, Rufin had modelled the praescriptio canonica after the Roman-law longi temporis praescriptio, which had both liberative and acquisitive effect. The author of Animal est substantia, the last major work of the Parisian school, seems to have aimed at harmonizing both interpretations, but the decretal Quoniam omne (4Conc. Lat. c.41; X 2.26.20) superseded his solution.




 Cf. R.H. Helmholz, The spirit of classical canon law, Athens 1996, p. 175–176; see also his: Legal formalism, substantive policy, and the creation of a canon law of prescription, in: W. Krawietz et al. (eds), Prescriptive formality and normative rationality in modern legal systems, Festschrift Robert S. Summers, Berlin 1994, p. 264–283.


 Traditio, 14 (1958), p. 121–189. With regard to early doctrine his study superseded those of Pietro Gismondi and Luigi Scavo Lombardo. See also P. Finkenberger, Der Rechtserwerb kraft bona fides in den Summen der Dekretistik, insbesondere bei Huguccio von Pisa, [Dissertation Würzburg 2007] available online at ).


 Vilain, p. 147, reports in a footnote that continuous good faith was required by Sicardus, Honorius (De iure canonico tractaturus), Rodoicus Modicipassus (summa Lipsiensis) and the author of Permissio quedam, but not in the summa Bambergensis (Animal est substantia).


 See Gouron, L’auteur du Codi (supra, n. 31), p. 2; J.A Brundage, The medieval origins of the legal profession, Canonists, civilians and courts, Chicago 2010, p. 111–114; R.G. Witt, The two latin cultures and the foundation of Renaissance Humanism in Medieval Italy, Cambridge 2012, p. 337–343.


 Cf. Weigand, The transmontane decretists (supra, n. 4), p. 180.


 Brundage, Medieval origins (supra, n. 32), p. 282. On the Parisian schools, see Weigand (supra, n. 4), p. 174–210.


Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 10 10 7
Full Text Views 6 6 6
PDF Downloads 2 2 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0