Actions in rem and in personam in the light of classical and Justinian Roman law

Abstract

The paper is divided into two main parts and focuses on the analysis of the selected Roman law sources concerning the classification of actions either in rem (actiones in rem) or in personam (actiones in personam). The aim of the paper is not only to present the above-mentioned categories of actions, but also to try to prove, by means of the interpolation method, the thesis according to which in Justinian Roman law the criterion for the division between actions in rem and actions in personam was not as clear as in the previous classical law. In classical law, actions in rem and actions in personam were part of the civil law framework and the distinction between them was clear: an action in rem assumed the existence of a right in rem, an action in personam an obligation. In addition, in the classical period of Roman law we also find a special category of actions ius honorarium, which were based on a praetorian edict. In the Justinian period, all actions were divided into actions in rem and actions in personam. This means that even actions which previously had their own individuality, e.g. hereditary actions (hereditatis petitio), publician actions (actio Publiciana), distributive actions (actiones divisoriea) and others, were systematised according to this new criterion.