Forum

At Common Law. A place; a place of jurisdiction; the place where a remedy is sought; jurisdiction; a court of justice.

Forum conscientiae

The conscience.

Forum contentiosum

A court.

3 Bl. Comm. 211.

Forum contractus

The courts of the place of making a contract.

2 Kent, Comm. 463.

Forum domesticum

A domestic court.

1 W. Bl. 82.

Forum domicilii

The court of the place of domicile.

2 Kent, Comm. 463.

Forum, ecclesiasticum.

An ecclesiastical court

Forum rei gestae. The court of the place of transaction.

2 Kent, Comm. 463.

Forum, rei sitae. The court of the place where the thing is situated.

Forum seculare

A secular court. Forum, ligeantiae rei. The court or jurisdiction of the county to which defendant owes allegiance.

Forum regium

The king's court. St. Westminster II. c.

43.

Forum rei, or rei sitae (Law Lat.) The forum or court of the thing (res rei); the court of the place where a thing claimed is; the tribunal where the property is.

Story, Confl. Laws, § 325k.

The place where a thing in controversy is situated, considered as a place of jurisdiction and remedy.

2 Kent, Comm. 463.

In Roman LavA The paved open space in cities, particularly in Rome, where were held the soiemn business assemblies of the people, the markets, the exchange (whence cedere foro, to retire from 'change, equivalent to "to become bankrupt"), and where the magistrates sat to transact the business of their office. It came afterwards to mean any place where causes were tried, locus exercendarum litium. Isidor. lib.

18, Grig. A court of justice.

The obligation and the right of a person to have his case decided by a particular court. It is often synonymous with that signification of judicium, which corresponds to our word "court" (q. v.) in the sense of jurisdiction; e. g., foro interdicere (1. 1, § 13, D. 1. 12; C. 9, § 4; D. 48. 19); fori praescriptio (1. 7, pr. D. 2, 8; L 1, C. 3, 24); forum rei accusator sequitur (1. 5, pr. C. 3, 13). In this sense, the forum of a person means both the obligation and the right of that person to have his cause decided by a particular court.

5 Gluck, Pand. 237.

What court should have cognizance of the cause depends, in general, upon the person of the defendant, or upon the person of some one connected with the defendant. By modern writers upon the Roman law, jurisdiction dependent on the person of the defendant is distinguished as (1) that of common right, forum commune, and (2) (1) Forum commune. The jurisdiction of common right was either general, forum generale, or special, forum speeiale. (a) Forum generale. General jurisdiction was of two kinds, the forum originis, which was that of the birthplace of the party, and the forum domicilii, that of his domicile. The forum originis was either commune or proprium. The former was that legal status which all free-born subjects of the empire, wherever residing, had at Rome when they were found there, and had not the jus revocandi domum (i. e., the right of one absent from his domicile of transferring to the forum domicilii a suit instituted against him in the place of his temporary sojourn).

L. 2, §§ 3, 4, 5, D. 5, 1; 1. 28, § 4, D. 4, 6; 3 Gluck, Pand. 188.

The forum originis proprium, or forum originis speeiale, was the court of that place of which at the time of the party's birth his father was a citizen, though that might possibly be neither his own birthplace, nor the actual domicile of his father.

Forum domicilii

The place of the domicile exercised the greatest influence over the rights of the party. As to what constitutes domicile, see "Domicile." In general, one was subject to the laws and courts of his domicile alone, unless specially privileged.

L. 29, D. 50, 1. (b) Forum speeiale.

Particular jurisdiction

These were very numerous. The more important are: Forum contirventiae causarum. Sometimes two or more actions or disputed questions are so connected that they cannot advantageously be tried separately, although in strictness they belong to different jurisdictions. In such cases the modern civil law permits them to be determined in a single court, although such court would be incompetent in regard to a portion of them taken singly. Forum contractus, the court having cognizance of the action on a contract. Forum delicti, forum deprehensionis. The jurisdiction of the person of a criminal, and may be the court of the place where the offense was committed, or that of the place where the criminal was arrested.

Forum arresti

A jurisdiction unknown to the Roman law, but of frequent occurrence in the modem civil law. It is that over persons or things detained by a judicial order, and corresponds in some degree to the "attachment" of our practice.

Forum gestae administrationis

The jurisdiction over the accounts and administration of guardians, agents, and all persons appointed to manage the affairs of third parties. The court which appointed such administrator- or wherein the cause was pending in which such appointment was made, or within whose territorial limits the business of the administration was transacted, had exclusive jurisdiction over all suits arising out of his acts, or brought sation for his outlays.

L. 1, C. 3, 21; 6 Gluck, Pand. § 521. (2) Forum privilegiatum.

Privileged jurisdictions

In general, the privileged jurisdiction of a person held the same rank as the forum domicilii, and, like that, did not supplant the particular jurisdictions above named save in certain exceptional cases. The privilege was general in its nature, and applied to all cases not specially excepted, but it only arose when the person possessing it was sued by another; for he could not assert it when he was the ■ plaintiff, the rule being, actor sequitur forum rei, the plaintiff must resort to the jurisdiction of the defendant. It was in general limited to personal actions; all real actions brought against the defendant in the character of possessor of the thing in dispute followed the forum speciale. The privilege embraced the wife of the privileged person and his children so long as they were under his potestas. And, lastly, when a forum privilegiatum, purely personal conflicted with the forum speciale, the former must yield.

6 Gluck, Pand. 339-341.

Privileged persons were: (a) Personae miserabiles, who were persons under the special protection of the law on account of some incapacity of age, sex, mind, or condition. These were entitled, whether as plaintiffs or defendants, to carry their causes directly before the emperor, and, passing over the inferior courts, to demand a hearing before his supreme tribunal, whenever they had valid grounds for doubting the impartiality or fearing the procrastination of the inferior courts, or for dreading the influence of a powerful adversary. 6 Gluck, Pand. § 622. (b) Clerici, the clergy. The privilege of clerical persons to be impleaded only in the episcopal courts commenced under the Christian emperors. (c) Academici. In the modern civil law, the officers and students of the universities are privileged to be sued before the university courts. This species of privilege was unknown to the Roman law.

See 6 Gluck, Pand. § 524. (d) Milites.

Soldiers had special military courts as well in civil as criminal cases. There are many classes of persons who are privileged in respect to jurisdiction under the modern civil law who were not so privileged by the Roman law. Such are of Hcers of the court of the sovereign, including ministers of state and councillors, ambassadors, noblemen, etc.

These do not require extended notice

Jwrisdietion ex persona alterius, A person might be entitled to be sued in a particular court on grounds depending upon the person of another. Such were (1) the wife, who, if the marriage had been legally contracted, acquired the forwm of her husband (I. 65, D. 5, 1; 1. ult. D. 50, 1; 1. 19, D. 2, 1), Section 93, Voet. Com. ad Pand. D. 5, 1. (2) Servants, who possessed the jurisdiction of their master as regarded the forum domicilii, and also the forum privilegiatum, so far at least as the privilege was that of the class to which such master belonged, and was not purely personal. Gluck, Pand. § 510b. (3) The haeres, who in many cases retained the jurisdiction of his testator. When sued in the character of heir in respect to causes of action upon which suit had been commenced before the testator's death, he must submit to the forum, which had acquired cognizance of the suit.

LI. 30, 34, D. 5, 1.