That is, after his property has been distributed: meaning that we placed the man under interdiction, divided his property, and nothing remained with him. Then a creditor appears of whom they had previously been unaware, whose debt predated the interdiction. The author says: “He may recover his proportional share from the creditors.” What is his proportional share? We examine the ratio of his debt to what the creditors received. If it is found to be half of what the creditors received, he recovers from each one half of what he received; if it is a quarter, he recovers from each one a quarter of what he received.

For example, the debts amount to eight thousand, while the available assets are six thousand. We distribute the six thousand among the creditors, and then a creditor appears whose claim is four thousand. You add it to the previous debt, making the total debt twelve thousand. The ratio of the newly discovered debt to the total debt is one third, so he recovers one third of each creditor’s share.

His statement: “His interdiction is lifted only by a judge.” That is, the interdiction imposed upon an insolvent person may be lifted only by a judge. The reason is that it was established by the judge’s ruling, and whatever is established by a judge’s ruling cannot be lifted except by his ruling.

Thus, we do not say that the interdiction is lifted merely because his property has been divided among his creditors. Rather, the judge must lift it, and the judge must hasten to do so without delay. For example, if we distribute his available property among the creditors on Saturday, the judge may not delay lifting the interdiction until, for instance, Friday, because that would harm him. Rather, we say that he must lift it immediately upon the distribution of his property.