and the uninformed are alike with respect to the sale; his disposing of his own portion does not annul a right of pre-emption that has already fallen due to him.

If four men jointly possessed a quarter-share, and one of them was absent while the remaining three sold their respective portions of that quarter to a single purchaser in three successive contracts—one contract for each man—then the absentee returned and invoked pre-emption, he may take whichever of the three contracts he wishes. If he selects the first contract, it becomes exclusively his, and the purchaser acquires no right of pre-emption in it, for a person cannot claim pre-emption over property he did not yet own when the right first arose. Should he choose the second or the third contract while leaving the first intact, the purchaser becomes his partner in the portion he has pre-empted, because the buyer had already acquired ownership through the first contract.

When someone sells a share of his jointly held houses in a single transaction and there is only one pre-emptor, and that person wishes to take part of it and leave part, he is not permitted to do so; he must either take it all or relinquish it. Likewise, if the share sold has several potential pre-emptors and some of them forgo their right, whoever still wishes to exercise pre-emption may only take the whole share or leave it entirely.

The same ruling applies when the present partner’s co-owner entitled to pre-emption is absent: the present partner must take the entire share, and when the absentee arrives, he may reclaim his own portion from him. The absentee’s right of pre-emption remains valid and is not extinguished by the length of his absence, and a minor’s right of pre-emption likewise persists until he reaches puberty.