TITLE XV – OF TRANSACTIONS
Art. 1. A transaction is an agreement between two or more persons who for preventing or putting an end to a law suit, adjust their differences, by mutual consent, in the manner which they agree on and which every one of them prefers to the hope of gaining, balanced by the danger of losing.
This contract must be reduced into writing.
Art. 2. A man, to transact, must have the capacity to dispose of the things included in the transaction.
The tutor or curator of a minor or of a person interdicted or absent, cannot make a transaction without being authorised thereto by the judge.
Art. 3. Transactions regulate only the differences which appear clearly to be comprehended in them, by the intention of the parties, whether it be explained in a general or particular expression: unless it be the necessary consequence of what is expressed: and they do not extend to differences which the parties never intended to include in them.
The renunciation which is made therein to all rights, claims and pretensions, does extend only to what relates to the differences from which said transaction arises.
Art. 4. If he who had a difference with several persons, transacts with one of them for what concerns him in particular, the transaction does not destroy his rights against the others, and he may either sue them at law, or transact with them in another manner.
Art. 5. If he who has a difference transacts it with one whom he believes to be his adverse party, but who is not so, the said transaction will have no effect.
Art. 6. If he who has transacted concerning a right which he had in his own person, acquires afterwards a like right which belonged to another, the transaction cannot be prejudicial to his new right.
Art. 7. One may add to a transaction, the stipulation of a penalty against the party who fails to perform it, and in this case the non performance of what has been agreed on, gives a right to exact the penalty according to the tenor of the agreement and pursuant to the rules recited in the title of contracts and conventional obligations in general.
Art. 8. The creditor who transacs with the surety of his debtor, may discharge the surety only and the transaction will not diminish his right against the debtor. But if it is with the debtor himself that he has transacted, the surety will likewise have the benefit of the transaction because his obligation is only an accessory to that of the principal debtor.
Art. 9. A transaction made by one of the interested parties, is not binding for the others and cannot be opposed by them.
Art. 10. Transactions have between the interested parties, a force equal to the authority of things adjudged, because they stand in the place of a judgement which is so much the stronger because all the parties have consented to it and because the engagement which delivers the parties from the inconvenience of a law suit, is altogether favorable. They cannot be attacked on account of any error in law or any lesion. But an error in calculation in a transaction may always afterwards be corrected.
Art. 11. A transaction may be rescinded notwithstanding, whenever it exists, an error in the person or on the matter in dispute. It may likewise be rescinded in the cases where there exists fraud or violence.
Art. 12. A transaction may be also rescinded when it has been made in execution of an illegal act, unless the parties have expressly transacted on the said nullity.
Art. 13. If a transaction has been grounded on forged writings which passed for true ones and the forgery be discovered afterwards, he who complains of it, may procure the transaction to be annulled in all that has been regulated on that foundation.
Art. 14. If after judgement has been given in a law suit, without the knowledge of the parties, they agree it by a transaction, the transaction will subsist if there lies an appeal from the sentence, for since the law suit may still be continued, the event remains uncertain, but if there lies no appeal from the sentence, the transaction would be null.
Art. 15. When the parties have transacted generally on all the differences which they might have had with one another, the titles which they then knew nothing of and which were afterwards discovered are not a cause of rescinding the transaction, unless they have been kept concealed on purpose by the deed of one of the parties.
But the transaction becomes void, if it relates only to an object on which it is proved by the titles newly discovered, that one of the parties has no right at all.