It is valid.¹

Section

If a person appends to his acknowledgment a clause that would void it—such as saying, “I owe him one thousand, but it is not binding on me”² or anything similar—he nevertheless remains liable for the thousand. If he states, “He did have a claim against me and I have settled it,” his word, together with his oath³, is accepted unless evidence⁴ to the contrary is produced or he himself admits the underlying cause of the debt.

Should he say, “I owe him one hundred,” then pause long enough to speak and only afterwards add, “but the coins are counterfeit” or “the payment is deferred”⁵, he is liable for one hundred⁶ sound coins payable immediately. If he acknowledges a deferred debt while the creditor denies any deferment, the debtor’s statement—supported by his oath—prevails.

Likewise, if he admits that he granted a gift or a pledge and delivered it, or that he has received its price or something similar, then later denies having taken delivery⁷—without disavowing his original acknowledgment—and requests that his opponent be put under oath, he is entitled to demand that oath.

If, after selling, gifting, or emancipating something, he subsequently claims that the property actually belonged to someone else, his statement is not accepted, the sale (or other act) is not undone, and he must compensate the person to whom he now ascribes ownership⁸.