Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. The Cambridge Law Journal
  4. Content listing
Journal Home

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals: Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies: Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

9363 results in The Cambridge Law Journal

Page 408 of 469

  • Furtum Proprium and Furtum Improprium

  • David Daube
  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 6 / Issue 2 / July 1937
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. 217-234
    Print publication:
    July 1937

  • According to P. Huvelin the lex Atinia read as follows: Quod subruptum erit, nisi in potestatem eius, cui sub-ruptum est, revertatur, eius rei aeterna auctoritas esto. This reconstruction is no doubt fairly accurate. What, then, is the relation of the lex Atinia to the XII Tables? For, as it appears from the sources, it was already the XII Tables that excluded a res furtiva from usucaption.

  • Professor Alexander Pearce Higgins, K.C., C.B.E., F.B.A., M.A., LL.D

  • P. H. W.
  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 6 / Issue 1 / March 1936
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, p. 93
    Print publication:
    March 1936
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • Pleading and Proof at Common Law

  • H. A. Hollond
  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 6 / Issue 1 / March 1936
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. 1-15
    Print publication:
    March 1936

  • Few laymen know that the expression ‘the pleadings’ in an action denotes the written allegations of fact which each party is required to communicate to his opponent before trial, in order that each may know what contentions he will have to meet, if possible, by evidence, and that an issue, or issues, of fact or of law may emerge. This unexpected meaning comes down in direct descent from the Middle Ages, when opposing counsel strove in Court to extract an issue from the conflicting pleas (placita) submitted by them orally.

    Thirteenth century.

    During the earlier part of this country proof was formal and the function of the Court was to declare which of the parties must go to proof and how. In certain classes of cases proof by battle was appropriate, in others proof by oath—either the oath of the party, supported by oath-helpers, or the oath of witnesses.

Page 408 of 469