١٢ Judgment (New).—v. Appeal by the Parquet.

١٣ Judgment (Omission of date of the offence).—v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of judgment), 1°, 8°.

١٤ Judgment (Partial affirmance of—).—v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of judgment), 5°, 11°.

١٥ Judgment (Preparatory)—1° Where, in a partition action, before deciding on the merits, an order is made postponing the hearing pending the trial, before another Court, of a suit between the defendant and a third person, such order is not to be deemed merely preparatory, and it is consequently appealable before the delivery of judgment on the merits. (Trib. App. Zagazig 13 March 1906; No. 76, p. 50.)

١٦ 2° v. Appeal (Admissibility), 2°.

١٧ Judgment (Separate).—v. Trial in camera.

١٨ Judgment (Time limited for signature).—v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of procedure), 2°.

١٩ Judgment by default.—1° The law recognises but one kind of default, namely, failure to appear at the hearing. A judgment entered in a criminal cause where the person accused was present during the trial is therefore deemed to have been delivered in a contested suit, notwithstanding the fact that such person did not plead. (Cass. 8 April 1905; No. 3, p. 2.)

٢٠ 2° v. Appeal (Dismissal "motu proprio") Appeal by the Parquet, Cassation (Effect), Opposition (Time for), Opposition by an agent,

٢١ Judgment by default (Appeal from).—v. Appeal, (Admissibility), 1°; Appeal (Dismissal, "motu proprio").

٢٣ Judgment of a Mehkemeh (Execution).—v. Expropriation (Administrative).

٢٤ Judgment on Appeal (Designation of offence).—v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of procedure), 1°.

٢٥ Judgment on Opposition.—v. Cassation (Effect).

٢٦ Judgment reversed on Appeal.—v. Execution (Responsibility for—).

٢٢ Judgments implied acquiescence in.—v. Acquiescence implied.

٢٧ Jurisdiction.—v. Meglis Hasby (Appeal from decision of—).

٢٨ Jurisdiction (Assignment to confer).—Where a suit brought by the assignee of a chose in action or by the indorsee of a negotiable instrument, is prima facie within its jurisdiction, the Court should not, of its own motion enquire as to whether or not the assignment or the indorsement was made in order to give it jurisdiction. Even where the defendant has, on the ground that such is the fact, raised the exception of want of jurisdiction, the Court should refuse to admit it. This rule is, however, inapplicable where the Court is of opinion that the assignment or the indorsement has been effected for the purpose of enabling the assignee or indorsee to plead in behalf of another without observing the provisions of the law relating to admission to the Bar. (Cir. No. 6, 7 July 1904; No. 45, p. 27.)

٢٩ Jurisdiction (Domicil of defendant).—I. Where, on a sale of land, the purchaser gives a bill of exchange to the vendor in lieu of payment of the purchase money, and the latter indorses the same, the holder when suing on the bill, should bring the action before the Court having jurisdiction in the place of the defendant's domicil, and not, since the action is a personal one, before the Court within the jurisdiction of which the land is situate. II. Where a drawer and an indorser are sued on a bill of exchange, the action should be brought before the Court within the jurisdiction of which the drawer is domiciled since the indorser is joined merely as a surety. (Trib. App. Tanta, 18 April 1906: No. 63, p. 42.) [entry runs from index p. 11 onto p. 12]

٣٠ Jurisdiction (Plea to—).—1° Although, by reason of the amount involved, the Court has no cognizance of the suit, the defendant is estopped from pleading to the jurisdiction by the following facts:— 1. That he applied for an adjournment in order to put in certain receipts, which he then submitted as evidence of the payment of part of the amount claimed. 2. That he also consented to a further adjournment with a view to effect a settlement. (Trib. Alexandria 19 June 1905; No. 65, p. 43.)

٣١ 2° Where a defendant against whom judgment has been entered by default has served notice of opposition, wherein, without taking objection to the jurisdiction, he denies part of the plaintiff's claim, he cannot subsequently apply to have the action dismissed on the ground that the sum claimed is part of a disputed debt which exceeds in amount the limit of the Court's jurisdiction. (Sum. Trib. Naga Hamady, 12 March 1906; No. 67, p. 43.)

٣٢ Jurisdiction of Assize Courts. —1° The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure are applicable to the Assize Courts except in so far as they are modified by the special provisions of the law relating to these Courts. The Assize Court has therefore jurisdiction for the trial of a person who has committed a misdemeanour at the sitting. (Cass. 24 June 1905; No. 14, II, p. 9.)

٣٣ 2° Art. 242 C. Cr. Pr., whereby it was provided that juvenile offenders prosecuted for crime were to be tried by the Summary Tribunal, has been repealed by the Law of 12 January 1905. The trial of such offenders is, therefore, now within the jurisdiction of the Assize Courts. (Cir. No 8, 19 May, 1906; No. 81, p. 52.)

٣٤ Jurisdiction of Markaz Tribunals.— The Markaz Tribunals have jurisdiction under art. 3 of the Law establishing the Markaz Tribunals (14 February 1904) to try for the theft of crops specified in art. 276 P. C. and, to the extent defined in the said art. 3, may inflict the penalty of imprisonment. (Cir. No. 1, 18 January 1905; No. 46, p. 28.)

٣٥ Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals.— 1° The special provision of art. 19 of the Decree of 22 February 1894 (Dykes and Canals), whereby the administrative authority is empowered to deal with acts of undue interference with irrigation, does not oust the jurisdiction of the Courts to try an action for the recovery of the land on which such acts have taken place. (Sum. Trib. Damanhour, 20 May 1905, No. 22, p. 12.)

٣٦ 2° The provision of the Prisons' Regulation Decree (9 February 1901) whereby a prisoner conditionally set at liberty may, in case of misconduct, be again incarcerated, does not derogate from the jurisdiction of the Courts to try him for a breach of the provisions of the decrees dealing with police supervision. (Cass. 6 January 1906; No. 28, p. 18.)

٣٧ 3° By art. 5 of Decree of 12 July 1888 it was provided that the "Caisse de la Dette" should be joined as a party to all suits in which an order for payment out of the liquidation funds might be made. As a result, such of the said suits as were cognizable at common law by the Native Tribunals were, by the joinder of the "Caisse," taken out of their jurisdiction. But the said Decree having been repealed by the Law of 28 November 1904 and the "Caisse" being, consequently, no longer a necessary party, these Tribunals have now recovered the jurisdiction of which they were thus temporarily deprived. Art. 66, parag. 2, of the said Law, whereby it is provided that no repeal therein contained shall have the effect of giving to any Courts jurisdiction which they did not possess before its coming into operation, does not, in its true construction, affect this result of the repeal. (App. 16 January 1906; No. 61, p. 41.)

٣٨ 4° Where a suit between natives has been commenced in a Native Tribunal, the mere fact that the defendant has an option of joining an alien as a party (in the present instance as guarantor), does not take it out of the Court's jurisdiction. (Trib. App. Zagazig, 21 February 1906; No. 114, p. 75.)

٣٩ 5° v. Expropriation (Administrative), Pre-emption, 1°.

٤٠ Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals (Wakf, Constitution of—).— The question as to whether the person establishing a wakf was in his last illness when he did so, is not one of those "relating to the establishment of wakfs" within the meaning of art. 16 O.D. It is, therefore, within the jurisdiction of the Native Tribunals. (App. 25 May 1905; No. 50, p. 34.)

٤١ Jurisdiction of Summary Tribunals.— The Summary Tribunal has jurisdiction to decide, as an interim measure of urgency, a suit in declaration of nullity of a conservatory arrestment not made in accordance with the provisions of arts. 410, 412, 415 C. C. Pr, (Sum. Trib. Maghagha, 17 April 1905; No. 21, p. 11.)

٤٢ Just title. — v. Prescription (Quinquennial, Acquisitive).

٤٣ Juvenile offenders.—1° In applying articles 61 and 64 P.C. (Juvenile Offenders) judges are requested to comply with the following instructions: 1. Where the disposition of the offender is not depraved, or where, owing to his mental development, a slight penalty would suffice, the judge should order him to be handed over to his parents or to be whipped. 2. Where the offender shows a decided tendency towards criminal misconduct, but, nevertheless, it appears that a change of moral atmosphere may amend his disposition, he should be committed to a reformatory. Except where the offender is over thirteen years of age the term of confinement in a reformatory should not be less than three years. 3. Where the offender is apparently incorrigible he should be sentenced to imprisonment. Cases concerning juvenile offenders should be disposed of without adjournment and allowed precedence over other cases in the cause list. This is especially applicable to appeals from judgments committing to a reformatory. (Cir. No. 8, 29 April 1905; No. 59, p. 36.)

٤٤ 2° v. Cassation (Substantial nullity of judgment), 3°.

٤٥ Juvenile offenders indicted for crime.—v. Jurisdiction of Assize Courts, 2°.

٤٦ Khalig.—v. Holidays (National and local).

٤٧ Kourban Baïram.—v. Holidays (National and local).

٤٨ Land.—v. Transcription (Bad faith.)

٤٩ Last illness.—v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals (Wakf, Constitution of—).

٥٠ Law (New).—v. Appeal (Admissibility), 3°.

٥١ Law (Retrospectivity of—).—v. Appeal (Admissibility), 3°; Retrospectivity of law, Retrospectivity of procedure rules.