LIVELLO. — This was the name given to a special form of agrarian contract by which a grantor (livellante) conferred the usufruct of a holding upon a grantee (livellario) for a specified period of time, under specific conditions and subject to the burden of an annual payment (rent) as consideration.
1. The l. is emphyteusis (v.). In the Middle Ages, it was the most widespread type of agrarian grant in Italy and may therefore be regarded as the characteristic medieval form of Italian emphyteusis. It was known, par excellence, as the pactum. It also came to be called precaria, the name by which it was known and widely used outside Italy as well. The name derived from the form of the instrument originally used in concluding the contract, since it had become customary to request the grant of the holding by means of a written petition addressed to the grantor, called libellum, charta, pagina libelli, etc. Sometimes the l. was drawn up by the grantor himself, in which case its delivery marked the completion of the transaction; at other times, there were two libelli, exchanged between grantor and livellario as notitiae of the grant that had been made. The name l., more often libellaria, was also used to indicate the relationship arising from the contract, as well as the rent that constituted its reciprocal consideration. The relationship was also frequently designated by the circumlocution tenere o colere per chartam o per libellum: holdings thus granted were called inchartati o libellati. In the l., as in emphyteusis, at the time of concluding the agreement the livellario was required to give the grantor the calciarium, also called the libellaticum or intratura, originally consisting of a pair of shoes, symbolizing the consideration owed for the grant.
2. Beginning in the early Middle Ages, as landed property passed from the collective and familial system characteristic of the barbarian-Germanic peoples to the individual private form, the original concept of undivided ownership was gradually replaced by the concept of divided ownership. By accentuating the Roman distinction between usus and dominium, between enjoyment of a thing and authority over it, this had led to the characteristic medieval distinction between direct ownership and beneficial ownership, giving rise, on this basis, to a significant complex of new relationships. Among these, alongside the benefice, emphyteusis, the fief, and other analogous forms of possession, the l. held particular importance. It is already mentioned in documents of the sixth century. For example, it is discussed by s. Gregorio Magno in his letters and by Cassiodoro in the Varia.
It is held that originally the ecclesiastical benefice had its earliest expression, under the name precaria, in a livellary relationship between a bishop, as grantor, and a cleric responsible for the care of souls, as grantee, and that the l. originated from this (c. 72, C. 12, q. 2; cc 4-6, C. 10, q. 2, etc.); in any event, its ecclesiastical origin seems indisputable. The fact is that the Church made very extensive use of it to put its lands to productive use, and promoted its introduction and diffusion precisely because, by virtue of the specific differences distinguishing it from emphyteusis—especially the temporary nature of the bond and the reversion clause in favor of the grantor—it proved the form of grant best suited to safeguarding the canonical principle that ecclesiastical property could not be alienated. Although it permitted the alienation of the usufruct, it provided the maximum protection for ownership.
3. Originally, the l. was a contractual relationship that granted the grantee the enjoyment of a genuine real right, together with the corresponding possessory protection, and had approximately the character of a lease ad laborandum
et meliorandum, as stated in the formulas of the period. In this respect, above all, it differed from emphyteusis, which amounted almost to a disguised alienation. Later, however, when ownership of the holdings was attributed to the livellati, the feudal relationship took its place, the livellary rent became a real encumbrance, and the act of grant was called investiture.
Unlike emphyteusis, the l. was ordinarily established for a definite period and generally lasted no more than twenty-five years. There are nevertheless l. established for longer periods, for the entire life of the investee, or even for an indefinite period. When the term expired, the contract was not considered terminated but had to be renewed. Periodic renewal, introduced in l. of indefinite duration in order to safeguard the owner’s right against prescription, was called recognitio in dominium and, when carried out, entailed payment to the grantor of a modest rent (laudêmio), which could take the form of a new symbolic calciarium. The livellario’s right of withdrawal at the end of the contract was sometimes stipulated. Ecclesiastical l. always included a reversion clause in favor of the grantor.
4. The rights and duties were substantially the same in emphyteusis and in the l., except that in the latter the rent was accompanied by other burdens and servitudes. The livellario was obliged to carry out the agricultural work, preserve the holding in good condition, and undertake the necessary improvements, which then accrued to the holding itself, that is, to the owner. He was responsible for the taxes and the annual rent (census, iustitia, dominica), which generally consisted of a share of the produce proportionate to the holding and almost never of a sum of money. In the feudal period, it was at times more a symbolic acknowledgment than a commercially assessable reality. The livellario’s right consisted in the full usufruct of the holding. This right was transmissible to legitimate heirs, but its alienation and transfer to unrelated heirs were not permitted without the owner’s consent. Often, however, subletting it under an l. to third parties was permitted. The relationship could be terminated either by a voluntary act of the parties or by forfeiture. Originally, failure to pay the rent entailed forfeiture of the l. Later, however, penalties came to be substituted for this consequence in the contract itself. In more recent periods, laws providing for the redemption of the rent also became grounds for termination.
5. With the end of the Middle Ages, a gradual legal regulation of the l. began, which little by little led to its merging with emphyteusis. A revival of considerable importance occurred only in the eighteenth century, in Tuscany, with the livellary system introduced under the direction of Pietro Leopoldo. By the time of the codifications, its identification with emphyteusis could be considered complete. The Napoleonic Code transformed l. into perpetual annuities. The Italian Civil Code of 1865 did not distinguish them from emphyteusis (arts. 1556–67); nevertheless, it required the original regulation of those constituted in earlier periods to be preserved, while granting the right of redemption (Transitional Provisions, arts. 29, 30). The current Code recognizes only emphyteusis (arts. 957–77). The CIC likewise ignores the l. as an autonomous type of contract, and the canonical rules on emphyteusis must therefore be applied to old l. (can. 1542; V. ENFITEUSI).
Zaccaria da San Mauro