Doubt — Bontempi, Palladium Theologicum V · from Schola Thomistica
Doubt I: When a thing acquired by contract is to be restored
THREE cases are adduced in which things acquired by contract must be given back. The first, if the contract is unjust and null by the law of nature. But when this happens will be said in the Disput. de contractibus. The second case is if the contract is null by some human law, as a purchase from a minor; or if it impedes the translation of ownership, for what reason. Testators cannot be deprived of necessary heirs. The third is when the contract is rescinded by the sentence of a Judge, for a human law, founded upon the presumption of fraud. See Valentia disput. 5. quaest. 6. punct. 5, and Tanner. disp. 4. quaest. 6. dub. 13, citing others. Thus it is gathered from D. Bonaventure in speculo animae, cap. 2.
Quando restituenda sit res acquisita per contractum.
TRES casus afferuntur, in quibus acquisita per contractum sunt reddenda. Primus, si contractus iure naturae sit iniquus, et nullus. Hoc autem quando eveniat; dicetur Disput. de contractibus. Secundus casus est, si contractus sit nullus ex aliqua lege humana, ut emptio a pupillo; vel si impediat translationem dominii, qua ratione. Testatores nequeunt haeredes necessarios privare Tertius est, quando per sententiam Iudicis rescinditur contractus veritus lege humana, fundata in praesumptione fraudis. Vide Valentiam disput. 5. quaest. 6. punct. 5. Tanner. disp. 4. quaest. 6. dub. 13. alios citantem. Sic colligitur ex D. Bonavent. in speculo animae, cap. 2.
AND the rationale of this last case is that what is given through fraud is considered to have been accepted involuntarily; but for the validity of contracts a free and voluntary consent on both sides is required, which is destroyed when error intervenes, as is plausible among Theologians and Jurisconsults. Yet if the error is voluntary on the part of the giver, then it is taken for fraud, and the contract is rescinded, and the obligation of restitution follows. See the authorities cited.
ET Ratio huius posterioris est, quia quod per fraudem datur, censetur involuntarie acceptum; Ad validitatem autem contractuum consensus liber, et voluntarius utrinque requiritur, qui errore interveniente tollitur, ut apud Theologos et Iurisconsultos plausibile est: Verum si error est voluntarius ex parte dantis, tunc pro fraude habetur, et contractus rescinditur, ac restituendi debitum succedit. Vide allegatos.