Definition
Vis exturbativa (Latin: "exturbative force") is a term from Roman civil law describing force used between two competing claimants to possession, where one attempts to physically thrust out or expel the other. It refers specifically to the contest of bodily force between rival possessors, as distinguished from force used against a person who has no claim at all.
The concept belongs to the Roman law taxonomy of vis — force or violence — and locates the particular wrong in the dynamic of a disputed possession: both parties assert a right, and one resorts to physical compulsion to oust the other rather than pursue a legal remedy.
Common Confusion
Vis exturbativa is one of several Latin vis compounds that appear in civil law sources and can blur together in research. The key distinctions:
Vis simplex (simple force) refers to ordinary force without the element of competing possession claims. Vis armata describes force accompanied by arms or weapons. Vis exturbativa is specifically situational — it requires two contending claimants and the physical act of thrusting out. A researcher encountering any of these terms in a historical source should not treat them as interchangeable; the civil law treatises and the interdict system attached different legal consequences to each category.
Why It Matters in Research
This is a rare technical term, and its appearances in English-language legal sources are almost entirely confined to civil law digests, treatises on possession, and historical dictionaries. Researchers are most likely to encounter vis exturbativa in:
— Commentaries on the Roman interdicts, particularly the interdict unde vi, which provided a remedy when possession was seized by force. Vis exturbativa describes the factual predicate for that interdict in the specific case of rival claimants.
— Scottish and Louisiana legal sources, where civilian possession doctrine persisted longer than in common law jurisdictions, and Roman classifications of force appear in substantive discussion rather than mere passing citation.
— 18th and 19th century American and English equity treatises addressing possessory remedies, which sometimes adopted civilian vocabulary to fill doctrinal gaps.
The term does not appear in modern American case law or statutory sources in any practical sense. If it appears in a source you are researching, it signals that the author is drawing on civilian tradition and likely distinguishing the case from a scenario where the ejected party had no colorable claim at all — a distinction that could affect which remedy was available.
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's Law Dictionary and Burrill's Law Dictionary are in close agreement, with Burrill offering the slightly fuller version. Both trace the term to Calvinus's Lexicon Juridicum (Calv. Lex.), a major 17th-century Latin legal dictionary that was a standard reference for civilian vocabulary. Neither source moves beyond the definitional, and neither connects vis exturbativa to specific English or American case law — which is consistent with the term's status as learned civilian vocabulary rather than operative common law doctrine.
Neither dictionary addresses the interdict system directly in the entry, which is the primary context in which the Roman category does legal work. Researchers relying solely on these dictionary entries will understand the meaning of the term but miss the procedural and remedial framework that gives it consequence. Consulting a treatise on Roman possession law or a commentary on the interdicts is necessary for full context.
Jurisdictional Note
Vis exturbativa as a working legal category is primarily relevant in jurisdictions with civilian or mixed civil-common law heritage — particularly Louisiana and Scotland. In common law jurisdictions, the functional concern (competing claimants resorting to force) is addressed through trespass, ejectment, and self-help doctrines without the need for Roman taxonomic vocabulary.