Quod metus causa gestum erit, ratum non habebo

Abstract

This paper analyses the information provided by Ulpianus in relation to the existence of two edicts and the exclusion of violence in the second one by understanding that vis compulsiva is included in the term metus. The paper also analyses the requirements of metus for the application of the edict and the means of protection of the victim who, due to intimidation, has carried out an act or deed with legal consequences.