论文部分内容阅读
公元前93年发生的库流斯案件的两造分别由法学家谢沃拉和演说家克拉苏斯代理,前者主张字义说,导致主张遗嘱无效,适用法定继承;后者主张真意说,大胆补充遗嘱的漏洞,维护遗嘱的效力。后者胜诉,表明古罗马的遗嘱解释已从严格解释走向衡平解释,也表明罗马律师中演说家派对法学家派的胜利。这个案件由于其包含的丰富意义,在历史上引起了长久的众多讨论。该案的要旨对于处理我国的遗嘱解释问题也有借鉴意义。
The two cases of KUR’s case that occurred in 93 BC were represented by the jurist Shevala and the speaker Krasus, who advocated the meaning of the word meaning, resulting in the invalidation of the will and the statutory succession; the latter advocated the true meaning that the bold addition Loopholes in the will to maintain the validity of the will. The latter victories showed that the testament interpretation of ancient Rome had moved from strict interpretation to equitable interpretation and also demonstrated the victory of the speaker-lawyers of Roman lawyers. Due to the richness of its implications, this case has led to a long history of discussions. The essence of the case is also of reference to the handling of the question of testament interpretation in our country.