PRAETORIAN DELICTS

There were, as has been said, other minor delicts deriving from the civil law, and in addition the Praetor created a number of penal actions.

Dolus embraced any fraud or deceit practised to the detriment of another. The action was for restitution or damages in default. Because of its wide and fluid character, dolus might have sub­verted the careful structure of the other delicts, and of the law of contract as well, and it was presumably for this reason that the action could be brought only if no other of any kind were available. In the language of the civilians, it was a ‘subsidiary’ action.^{[96] [97]}

Metus was duress. If a man was induced by threats to act in some way to his own detriment, an action lay for fourfold his loss. This action had two features which, in view of this large penalty, are curious. The defendant could, as in the actio doli, escape liability by making restitution; and the action seems to have lain against a third party who, even innocently, acquired property which had been extorted from the plaintiff.

6.