١ Absence.—v. Service of judgment, 2°.

٢ Abuse of confidence.—v. Jurisdiction of Summary Tribunals, 2°.

٣ Accomplice.—v. Adultery, 2°; False charge, 4°; Forgery, 2°.

٤ Accused (Appearance of—).—v. Civil claimant (Direct summons).

٥ Accused (Interest of—).—v. Cassation (Admissibility), 1°, 2°.

٦ Acknowledgment of seal.—1° Acknowledgment by a person that his seal has been made use of in sealing a document, unlike the acknowledgment of a signature, does not imply an admission that he himself affixed it thereto. He may consequently, without seeking its improbation, establish, by any evidence which he may be able to procure, the falsity of a private document, although it admittedly bears the impress of his seal. (Sum. Trib. Assouan, 20 November 1904; No. 56, p. 36.) 2° v. Denial of authenticity of document.

٧ Acquittal.—v. Jurisdiction of Criminal Tribunals, 1°.

٨ Act (Executive—).—v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals, 2°.

٩ Act of execution.—A procès-verbal stating that there are no effects is an act of execution within the meaning of art. 330 C.C.C.Pr., and causes the time for making opposition to run, the end which the law has in view being knowledge on the part of the person making default of the commencement of execution. (Sum. Trib. Assouan, 13 March 1904; No. 12, p. 4.)

١٠ Action (Civil).—v. Jurisdiction of Criminal Tribunals, 1°, 4°.

١١ Action (Criminal).—v. Forgery (Uttering), Jurisdiction of Criminal Tribunals, 1°, 4°.

١٢ Action (Principal).—v. Receiver (Application for appointment of—).

١٣ Action against the government.—v. Jurisdiction of Civil Tribunals.

١٤ Action for recovery of property seized.—v. Seizure, 1°, 2°.

١٥ Adjournment.—v. Civil claimant (Direct summons), Exception of want of jurisdiction.

١٦ Adultery.—1° A wife's adultery may be established by all legal means of proof. The restricted means of proof mentioned in Art. 238 P.C. relate only to her accomplice. (Cass. 14 January 1905; No. 49, p. 34.) 2° In making criminal proceedings for adultery against the wife depend on the husband's denunciation, the law has in view the protection of the family honour and the same principle applies to the prosecution of her accomplice. When, therefore, the husband has made no complaint against his wife, the accomplice cannot be prosecuted. (Sum. Trib. Aboutig, 2 April 1905; No. 83, I, p. 57.)

١٧ Advocate.—v. Trader.

١٨ Advocate's agent.—v. Trader.

١٩ Agency.—v. Mandate.

٢٠ Agent.—v. Mandate.

٢١ Aggravating circumstances.—v. Malicious wounding of animals, Theft, 1°.

٢٢ Agreement (Construction).—v. Sale with right of redemption, 2°.

٢٣ Alimony.—v. Conservatory arrestment.

٢٤ Amount at issue.—v. Exception of want of jurisdiction, Jurisdiction, 2°, 3°.

٢٥ Amount of claim.—v. Appeal (Amount of claim), Jurisdiction, 2°, 3°.

٢٦ Animals (Domestic—).—v. Jurisdiction of Markaz tribunals.

٢٧ Animals (Malicious wounding of—).—v. Malicious wounding of animals.

٢٨ Aperture.—v. Servitude of view.

٢٩ Appeal.—1° Compulsory intervention in appeal is, in principle, inadmissible where it has the effect of depriving the third person, not originally a party to the suit, of a right of trial by two successive degrees of jurisdiction. Nevertheless, since the rule as to the two degrees of jurisdiction is not, in this respect, a matter of public policy, such third person is at liberty to waive his rights and he will be taken to have done so when he has put in his pleadings on the merits before the Court of Appeal. (Trib. App. Kena, 12 May 1903; No. 53, I, p. 35.) 2° v. Cassation (Admissibility), 1°–5°.

٣٠ Appeal (Admissibility).—Every judgment in first instance is liable to appeal in the absence of a contrary provision in the law. Accordingly an appeal lies against a judgment given in chambers, since there is no text forbidding appeal in such cases. Appeal is only admissible against judgments in first instance. No appeal therefore lies from the judgment of an appellate tribunal on the opposition formed against an order to tax the costs of experts, when such experts have been appointed by the appellate tribunal. (Appeal 28 March 1905; No. 100, I, II, p. 74.)

٣١ Appeal (Amount of claim).—1° Appeal from a judgment is governed by the law in force at the time that such judgment is delivered and not by the law in force when the action was brought. Accordingly there is no appeal from a judgment on a claim, in a personal action, for a sum not exceeding 2000 P.T., when such judgment has been delivered after the date at which Law No. 11 of 1904, fixing the amount of an appealable claim at 2000 P.T. and upwards, came into force, although the action was commenced before such date. (Sum. Trib. Mellawi, 4 January 1905; No. 117, p. 88.) 2° It is well settled that appeal from a judgment is governed by the law in force at the time when such judgment is delivered, and not by the law in force when the judgment is served or when the action is brought. It follows that the judgment on a claim for L.E. 20 damages, delivered by a misdemeanour tribunal after the date at which Law No. 11 of 1904 came into force, is not susceptible of appeal by the civil claimant, although the action was brought before that date. (Cass. 8 April 1905; No. 96, p. 73.)

٣٦ Appeal (by Procureur général or Substitut).—The right of appeal in case of misdemeanour conferred on the Procureur Général or "Substitut" does not extend to a "Substitut-adjoint" except when it can be shown that the "Substitut-adjoint" is in control of the Parquet Summary tribunal. This is made clear by a comparison of the new Code with the old, which conferred the right of appeal on "Chefs de Parquet" only. The new Code confers it on "Substituts" because jurisdiction in misdemeanour cases has been extended to Summary tribunals, in which criminal proceedings are conducted by a "Substitut" and not a "Chef de Parquet." (Cass. 29 April 1905; No. 87, II, p. 66.)

٣٧ Appeal (by State representative).—v. Appeal (Parquet), 1°.

٣٢ Appeal (Effects).—v. Costs.

٣٣ Appeal (Notice of—).—v. Writ of summons, 2°.

٣٤ Appeal (Parquet).—1° A judgment by default becomes final as regards the Parquet if appeal is not lodged within the legal limit of time, and the appeal of the Parquet against the judgment confirming on opposition the judgment by default is for this reason inadmissible. (App. 12 June 1904; No. 88, p. 66.) 2° v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of procedure), 1°, Opposition, 1°; Service of judgment, 1°.

٣٥ Appeal (Time for).—When the revindicant of an immovable makes a deposit in accordance with Art. 597 of the C.C.C.Pr. and expropriation proceedings are in consequence stayed, the case is to be considered as urgent, and appeal from a decision on the revindicant's claim should be made within the 10 days' limit as provided by Art. 600. If, however, the deposit is not made, and the sale is consequently not suspended, there is no reason to depart from the usual practice, and appeal can be made in the ordinary limit of time (art. 353 C.C.C.P.). (App. 24 November 1904; N° 33, p. 20.)

٣٨ Appeal on the merits.—v. Costs, Execution (Stay of—) 1°.

٣٩ Arrestment.—v. Conservatory arrestment.

٤٠ Assault (Indecent).—v. Indecent assault.