Free_Law_Journal-Vol.. - Free World Publishing Inc.

FREE LAW JOURNAL - VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1 (18 JULY 2005)
system, serious sanctions are put into practice to the one, who claims that the definite judgement does not
exist and turned out to be in the wrong 60 .
CONCLUSION
In this article it is emphasized that some important principles and institutions of procedural law of current
law systems are based on the Roman procedural law. Bis de eadem re ne sit actio is one of the important
principles used in both Ordo iudiciorum privatorum and Cognitio extra ordinem procedures and also it
plays a considerable role in the current law systems. This principle proves that there can only be one
definite judgement on a controversial issue. Otherwise, justice can not be found in a community and
nobody relies on judgements given by courts. This would cause social chaos and people would choose to
protect their rights by themselves. But in an equitable community, the decisions given by the court is
considered as trusty and people know that the decision would not be changed in another time. Also, this
confidence to the judgement, prevents people to bring the dispute more than once to the court and
provides reliance to the State. Hence, a plaintiff would not be disturbed by summoning to the court
frequently. So it can be said that by accepting bis de eadem re ne sit actio pirinciple and other relevant
regulations and arrengements, Roman law tries to constitute an equitable comunity.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Arangio-Ruiz, V.; Storia del Diritto Romano, 7. Ed. con Note Aggiunte, Naples, 1957.
Berger, A.; Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law, Philadelphia, 1968.
Betti, E.; Istituzioni di Diritto Romano, V. I, Parte Generale Padova, 1960.
Buckland, W. W.; A Text-Book of Roman Law from Augustus to Justinian, Cambridge, 1932.
Burdese, A.; Manuale di Diritto Privato Romano, Turin, 1964.
Colquhoun, P.; Summary of the Roman Civil Law, London, 1849.
Di Marzo, S.; Roma Hukuku, 6.Ed, Transl. by Z. Umur, Istanbul, 1961- Roman Law.
De Zulueta, F.; The Institutes of Gaius, Part II, Oxford, 1953.
Frezza, P.; Le Garanzie delle Obbligazioni, Le Garanzie Personali, V. I, Padova, 1963.
Goudsmit, J. E.; The Pandects; A Treatise on the Roman Law and upon its Connections with Modern Legislation, Transl. by,
R. D. Tracy Gould, London, 1873.
Hunter, W. A.; Introduction to Roman Law, New Ed. by A. F. Murison London, 1921.
Karadeniz-Celebican, O.; Roma Esya Hukuku, Ankara, 2000- Law of Property.
Longo, G.; Richerche Sull’ “Obligatio Naturalis”, Milan, 1962.
Marrone, M.; “L’Efficacia Pregiudiziale della Sentenza nel Processo Civile, Annali Palermo, V. 24 1955.
Muirhead, J.; Historical Introduction to the Private Law of Roman, 3. Ed., Rev. and Ed. By H. Goudy, London, 1916.
Provera, G.; La Pluris Petitio nel Processo Romano I, La Procedura Formulare, Turin, 1958.
Pugliese, G.; “L’Actio e la Litis Contestatio nella Storia del Processo Romano”, Studi in Onore di Enrico Tullio Liebman, V. 1,
1979.
Pugliese, G.; Il Processo Civile Romano, Il Processo Formularae, V. II, Milan, 1963.
Roby, H. J.; Roman Private Law in the Times of Cicero and of Antonines, V. I, Cambridge, 1902.
Schulz, F.; Classical Roman Law, Oxford, 1951.
Sohm, R.; The Institutes: A Textbook of the History and System of Roman Private Law, Transl. by J. C. Ledlie, 3. Ed., New
Jersey, 1970.
Stephenson, A.; A History of Roman Law with a Commentary on the Institutes of Gaius and Justinian, Colorado, 1992.
Tahiroglu, B./ Erdogmus, B.; Roma Hukuku Meseleleri, 2. Ed., Istanbul, 2001- Some Matters in Roman Law.
Tahiroglu, B./ Erdogmus, B.; Roma Usul Hukuku, Istanbul, 1994- Roman Procedural Law.
Thomas, J. A. C.; Textbook of Roman Law, Amsterdam, 1976.
Umur, Z.; Roma Hukuku Lugatı, Istanbul, 1985- Roman Law Dictionary.
Umur, Z.; Roma Esya Hukuku, Istanbul, 1985- Roman Law of Property.
Wenger, L.; Institutes of the Roman Law of Civil Procedure, Transl. by H. O. Fisk, New York, 1949.
60 Hunter, W. A.; Introduction to Roman Law, New Ed. by A. F. Murison, London, 1921, p. 1011.
GOKCE TURKOGLU-OZDEMIR - “BIS DE EADEM RE NE SIT ACTIO” PRINCIPLE IN THE FORMULARY SYSTEM OF ROMAN LAW OF PROCEDURE 149