Question

Задача 1. Узнав о приказе выступить в царский поход, редум Иштар продал свой дом Таммузу, скрепив сделку глиняной табличкой. Вырученные деньги Иштар отдал Коммоду за то, чтобы тот выступил в поход вместо него. Вернувшись из похода, Коммод предал Иштара суду и потребовал себе дом, купленный у Иштара Таммузом. Будет ли выполнено требование Коммода? Какое решение вынесет суд в отношении Иштара?

Answer 1

В силу статьи 26 Законов Хаммурапи редум, нанявший наемника, дабы тот вместо него отправился в поход, должен быть казнен, а названный наемник может забрать его дом.

В силу статьи 37 Законов Хаммурапи дом, поле или сад редума не могут быть проданы третьим лицам. В случае заключения договора купли-продажи, чьим предметом они являются, такой договор считается недействительным.

Исходя из вышесказанного можно заключить, что требование Коммода правомерно, ибо:
В силу статьи 26 ЗХ он имеет право обратить в собственность недвижимое имущество, ранее принадлежащее Иштару;
В силу статьи 37 ЗХ договор купли-продажи указанного имущества, заключенный между Иштаром и Таммузом, недействителен (прим: применительно к данному случаю это означает, что право собственности на указанное недвижимое имущество не перешло к покупателю), а потому Коммод может истребовать данное имущество из незаконного владения Таммуза.

Иштар будет казнен.

P.S. Спасибо, поднял настроение, ибо давно уж не приходилось в Законах Хаммурапи копаться, да и задание довольно необычное для этих мест с:

Answer 2

Background Information

In this scenario, Redum Ishar sold his house to Tammuz and used the money to pay Commodus to take his place in the royal campaign. However, when Commodus returned from the campaign, he demanded the house back from Ishar. The question is whether Commodus' demand will be fulfilled and what decision the court will make regarding Ishar.

Analysis and Response

To determine whether Commodus' demand will be fulfilled and what decision the court will make, we need to consider the legal aspects of the situation. Unfortunately, the provided search results do not provide specific information about the legal system or laws in place during this time period. Therefore, it is difficult to provide a definitive answer based solely on the information given.

However, we can make some general observations and assumptions based on common legal principles. In most legal systems, the validity of a contract depends on several factors, including the consent of both parties, the legality of the subject matter, and the absence of any vitiating factors such as fraud or duress.

In this case, Redum Ishar willingly sold his house to Tammuz and used the money to pay Commodus. This suggests that there was a valid contract between Ishar and Tammuz, as well as between Ishar and Commodus. However, without further information, it is unclear whether the contract between Ishar and Tammuz included any conditions or restrictions on the sale of the house.

If the contract between Ishar and Tammuz did not include any conditions or restrictions, it is likely that Tammuz legally acquired the house and became its rightful owner. In this case, Commodus' demand to have the house returned may not be valid, as Ishar would no longer have ownership or control over the property.

On the other hand, if the contract between Ishar and Tammuz included specific conditions or restrictions, such as a right of repurchase or a condition that the house would be returned after the campaign, then Commodus may have a valid claim to the house. In this case, the court would need to consider the terms of the contract and any evidence presented by both parties before making a decision.

It is important to note that the outcome of a legal case can depend on various factors, including the specific laws and legal principles applicable at the time and place of the dispute. Without more information about the legal context and specific details of the case, it is not possible to predict with certainty what decision the court would make regarding Ishar and the house.

Conclusion

Based on the information provided, it is difficult to determine whether Commodus' demand to have the house returned will be fulfilled or what decision the court will make regarding Ishar. The outcome would depend on the specific terms of the contract between Ishar and Tammuz, as well as any applicable laws and legal principles.