٢ v. Continuing offence; Document (Private—Denial of authenticity of—); Document (Official—); Incidental claim; Res judicata, 2°.

v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of judgment), 4°.

v. Prescription (Acquisitive), 2°.

After giving judgment upon an incidental claim such as the improbation of a document, a Tribunal of First Instance must not immediately proceed to give judgment upon the merits of the case if the parties have not yet put in their pleadings. The Court of Appeal, however, is possessed of full powers wherewith to rectify all mistakes made on matters of procedure or on the merits of the case by the Tribunal of First Instance, and should therefore appoint a day for the hearing of the parties on the merits of the case and not send them back to the Tribunal of First Instance. (App. 23 December 1902; No. 62, p. 55).

v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of procedure), 2°.

v. Promissory note to order.

v. Investigation.

v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of procedure) 6°.

v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of procedure), 3°.

v. Slander.

١ I.—The publication of an Elam of interdiction pronounced by a religious council of the Orthodox Copts is not necessary on pain of nullity. The omission, therefore, of such publication does not render valid the contract made by the interdicted person after his interdiction. II.—It is not necessary for the validity of an Elam of interdiction that it should be pronounced in the presence of the person interdicted nor that he should be served with a notice of the Elam in any special manner. It is sufficient that he should have knowledge of such Elam. III.—Where a sale has been concluded by an interdicted person subsequently to his interdiction the contract is null and void independently of the question whether the sale was or was not advantageous to his interests, unless it has been ratified by the judge of his personal law. (Trib. Assiout, 23 Sept. 1901, No. 65, II, III, IV, p. 55).

٢ v. Prescription (Acquisitive), 2° (Note).

v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals, 2°.

v. Usury.

v. Appeal (Admissibility) 2°; Cassation (Grounds), 3°.

v. Prescription (Extinctive, Interruption of—); Prescription (Interruption).

١ An investigation ordered by a Court must be carried out before the Court ordering it or by a judge delegated ad hoc by the Court (Art. 183 C.C.C. Pr.). This rule is applicable in penal affairs. Consequently the Court, before which an accused calls witnesses for his defence, may not order the Parquet to hear them. (Trib. App. Kena, 22 December 1902; No. 50, p. 47).

٢ v. Expert.

v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of procedure), 6°.

v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of procedure), 3°; Counsel (Absence of accused's—).

v. Reconciliation (Procès-verbal of—); Taxing Order.

v. Abandonment of judgment).

v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of procedure), 4°.

v. Res judicata, 1°.

v. Res judicata, 2°.

v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of procedure), 1°.

v. Cassation (Grounds); Cassation (Substantial nullity of judgment); Recidive, 3°.

١ Since a judgment given against a party not validly represented in the case has no force against such party, its notification to the person who has appeared in the case as his representative having no authority for that purpose is without effect as regards the party so condemned and in particular cannot be considered as the starting point of any legal delay against him. (App. 12 December 1901; No. 19, II, p. 12).

٢ v. Appeal (Admissibility of—) 1°; Appeal (Time for—) 2°, 3°, 4°.

١ A judgment must be considered as given by default, even though the defendant has appeared at a former hearing, if the plaintiff has formulated fresh demands at a subsequent hearing at which the defendant was not present. (App. 3 March 1903; No. 86, p. 71).

٢ v. Citation (Regularity).

v. Appeal (Time for—), 4°.

A judgment by default on opposition, though not open to fresh opposition, is none the less a judgment by default, and is therefore open to recall until the close of the sitting (Art. 120 C.C.C. Pr). This principle also applies to penal cases. It follows, therefore, that the judgment by default on opposition ought to be quashed, if the Court has refused the demand of the accused, made before the close of the sitting, for the recall of the judgment. (Cass. 31 May 1902; No. 39, p. 35).

v. Incidental claim.

v. Costs (Judicial).

v. Receiver (Judicial—Appointment of—).

v. Receiver (Judicial-Appointment of—).

١ Where a debtor and his surety are sued together, the Court of the domicile of the principal debtor is alone competent. Art. 34 par. 1 of the Code of Procedure only applies where the obligation of the co-defendants is identical. (Trib. App. Alex. 16 April 1903; No. 107, p. 86).

٢ Notwithstanding a stipulation in a civil contract indicating a special place for payment other than the debtor's domicile, the action brought to enforce the said payment remains within the jurisdiction of the Court of the defendant's domicile. (Sum. Trib. Abdine, 17 November 1902; No. 42, p. 36).

The object of the legislator, in Art. 8 of the Regulations of 13 May 1883, relating to the establishment of the General Council of the Community of Orthodox Copts, was to confer upon such Council a power of administrative control over the charitable wakfs of that sect and not to invest it with judicial powers for the purpose of determining suits relating thereto. (Trib. Assiout 14 October 1901; No. 7, I, p. 3).