SOME REMARKS ON SLAVE-SELLERS’ LIABILITY UNDER ROMAN LAW

Abstract

This article discusses the matter of the liability of professional slave-sellers for non-disclosure of a material defect to the buyer under Roman law. After first examining the professional sellers’ representation and image as reported in the relevant sources, the article reviews the material defects of slaves for sale through the lens of jurists’ and other relevant authors’ discussion on morbus et vitium, and how the two relate to the sellers’ claims in regard to the slaves they are selling. Next, the article provides an overview of the buyer’s legal protection in the event of a found defect or false advertising, specifically in the form of actio redhibitoria. By analyzing legal and other relevant ancient Roman sources, this article probes the fine line between allowable sales talks and legally binding sales promises on a number of peculiar slave sale contracts under Roman law. Lastly, the article argues which party to the sale contract had the less favorable position in terms of carrying the risk of the unintentionally undisclosed material defects in the classical Roman law and explores the point at which the limits to advertising end and the seller’s liablity begins.

Keywords

• material defect
• curule aediles
• emptio venditio
• actio redhibitoria
• roman law