MOROSITÀ

DELAY. — From the Latin *mora*, delay, it is the undue delay or postponement in the fulfillment of an obligation. This unjustified delay can have repercussions in both the ethical and legal spheres. Moralists distinguish delay arising from the failure to return a thing unjustly possessed from delay due to the non-fulfillment of an obligation assumed by contract; jurists, on the other hand, speak more generally of the failure to perform a due obligation. Moreover, the law considers only legal culpability, without regard to voluntariness, whereas in moral theology the theological culpability prevails.

I. DELAY UNDER THE ETHICAL ASPECT

Delay occurs: 1) when the culpable non-fulfillment, relative to the fixed time, of an obligation assumed by a bilateral contract causes damage to the other party; 2) when the failure to return a thing possessed in bad faith causes damage to the true owner. In both cases, theological culpability and actual damage are presumed (in which case it is said that the debtor is “in mora”): from this arises the obligation to compensate for the damage itself by virtue of commutative justice. If either of these elements is lacking, there is no longer an obligation, unless a judge’s sentence, in accordance with the law, rules otherwise, in which case even one who has caused damage involuntarily is bound to compensate for II. In matters of contracts, the debtor is culpably in delay: a) when he does something that he was not supposed to do by contract; b) when he fails to do what he was supposed to do in a timely manner; c) when he does not perform within the time determined in the contract, that is, if he performs before the time fixed for the beginning or after the time fixed for the end; d) when the law recognizes by full right that delay has been incurred; e) when the debtor has been legally or formally questioned.

The amount of compensation will be that agreed upon in the contract (unless the judge modifies it); if it has not been fixed, it must be calculated according to an equitable assessment, so that if there has been no deceit, the foreseeable damages must be compensated, but if deceit has been involved, both the foreseeable damages and those immediately resulting from the violation of the contract must be compensated. However, in the case of money, compensation generally cannot exceed the legal rate.

In matters of the restitution of a thing not one’s own:
1) one who culpably delays the restitution is bound to compensate the owner for the damages suffered and that could have been foreseen, that is, those that commonly occur in such circumstances; not, however, extraordinary damages, except that the delinquent debtor had been sufficiently warned of them or had foreseen them;
2) if the restitution is delayed without fault, e.g.,