—v. Religious Creeds, Indignity to, 135.

Bill of exchange.—"Value received"; v. Bill of Exchange, 27.

— Falsification d'un acte — Usage — Infraction unique ; v. Faux, 57.

— Omission de remplir un devoir — Loi sur le recrutement militaire ; v. Jugement en matière pénale, 74.

— Usage de faux — Acte présenté dans une instance civile ; v. Prescription de l'action publique, 111.

٦٥ 65. — Inscription de faux incident — Délai — Amende. — L'inscription de faux incident ne peut être faite que tant que l'action principale est encore pendante. Elle ne peut pas avoir lieu au cours d'une procédure en requête civile. Celui qui demande à s'inscrire en faux, en pareille circonstance, encourt l'amende édictée par l'art. 291 C.P.C.C. (App. 19 novembre 1907, N° 47).

٦٦ 66. — Moyen de faux — Admissibilité — Expertise. — Un tribunal ne peut pas admettre comme moyen de faux un fait découvert au cours d'une expertise ordonnée en vertu de l'art. 284 C.P.C.C. dans une instance en inscription de faux. La partie ne peut pas non plus se réserver le droit de recourir à une nouvelle inscription de faux en se basant sur des moyens ainsi découverts. (Trib. Zagazig, 11 janvier 1908, N° 75).

٦٧ 67. — Transaction sur l'instance principale — Amende. — Paiement. — Lorsque, dans une instance en inscription de faux incident le demandeur a encouru l'amende prononcée par l'art. 291 C.P.C.C., le fait qu'il y eut ultérieurement transaction sur l'action principale n'a pas pour effet de le décharger de l'obligation de payer l'amende. (App. 3 novembre 1907, N° 102).

v. Procédure pénale, 122-129.

— Jugement ordonnant — Appel ; v. Appel en matière civile, 7.

—Appeal from order; v. Appeal, Civil, 11.

٧١ 71. —Criminal responsibility.—The enumeration by art. 57, § 2 P.C. of the circumstances under which intoxication constitutes an exculpatory circumstance is exhaustive: it cannot constitute insanity or mental infirmity within the meaning of § 1 of that article. (Ord. Com. Cairo, 8 June 1907; No. 12).

٦٨ 68. — Responsabilité pénale. — L'énumération dans l'art. 57 § 2 C.P. des circonstances dans lesquelles l'ivresse constitue une excuse absolutoire est limitative : ainsi l'ivresse ne peut constituer la démence ou l'infirmité mentale prévue au § 1 du même article. (Ord. ren., Caire 8 Janvier 1907, N° 12).

— Envoi dans une école de réforme. — « Peine » ; v. Appel en matière pénale, 12.

—Opposition after the prescriptive period; v. Prescription of Public Action, 119.

—Waiver of opposition—Satisfaction in part ; v. Judgment by Default 93.

—Judgment in pre-emption suit; v. Pre-emption, 111.

—Expert, Order appointing ; v. Appeal, Civil, 9.

—Interrogatories, Order for; v. Appeal, Civil, 11.

٩١ 91. —"Appearance at the first hearing."—The appearance of a defendant at the sitting for distribution of causes is not an appearance "at the first hearing" within the meaning of art. 125 C. C. C. Pr., and judgment subsequently given in his absence is, consequently, not to be regarded as given in a contested suit. (Trib. Cairo, 28 August 1907; No. 92).

٩٢ 92. —Default of accused after appearance.—In a case of misdemeanor, the Summary Court ordered an adjournment of the hearing in order that the civil claimant and the accused might submit conclusions. At the next sitting the civil claimant submitted conclusions and some of the accused appeared and replied thereto but others of the accused failed to appear. Held, that the judgment given against those of the accused who failed to appear must be deemed to be a default judgment and subject to opposition. (Trib. App. Assiout, 5 September 1907; No. 32).

٩٣ 93. —Delivery before day named in summons—Partial satisfaction—Waiver of opposition.— A judgment by default will be set aside on opposition if it was pronounced before the date on which the defendant was summoned to appear. The fact that, in order to avoid seizure, he partly satisfied the judgment does not constitute acquiescence therein. (Sum. Trib. Mina-el-Kamh, 29 May 1907; No. 69).

—Delivery before day named in summons; v. Judgment by Default, 93.

٧٢ 72. Contents.—Claim not decided.—Amendment of claim.—To obtain the revocation of a judgment on the ground that the Court has failed to adjudicate on one of the counts of the claim, the petitioner must shew that judgment has not been given on one or more of the issues raised by the final conclusions in the action. The judgment will not be revoked because it does not deal with issues raised in the earlier, but omitted from the final conclusions. (App. 3 Nov. 1907; No. 101).

٧٣ 73. —Contents—Claim not decided—Claim to produce evidence.—A petition for revocation of judgment based on omission to give judgment must show that one or more of the claims for relief in the action have not been dealt with. Mere omission to give judgment on a claim to employ a particular method of proof is not a good ground for revocation. (App. 10 April 1907; No. 29).

٧٤ 74. —Contents—Inconsistency.—The fact that the grounds of a judgment are inconsistent, or that the grounds and the operative part are inconsistent, is not sufficient to justify revocation of the judgment under art. 372, § 6, C.C.C.Pr. Even where the operative part is inconsistent the judgment will not be revoked unless the contradiction is such as to render execution impossible. (App. 10 April 1907; No. 71).

—Contents—Locality of the offence; v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals inter se, 95.

—Contents—Particulars of offence—Libel—Legal participation of persons sentenced ; v. Press Offences, 121.

— Extract.—Failure to deliver; v. Cassation, 32.

٧٥ 75. —Appeal judgment—Grounds.—When a sentence of a Summary Court is increased on appeal the reasons for such increase need not be stated in the judgment given on appeal. (Cass. 28 Dec. 1907; No. 40, II).

٧٦ 76. — Contents — Age of accused.— The age of an offender ought to be stated in a judgment of conviction in order to satisfy the Court of Cassation that he is not a juvenile offender within the meaning of Title I Ch. IX P.C. The omission to do so is a substantial nullity. The mention of the age of the offender in the official record of the sitting does not remedy the omission. (Cass. 13 April 1907; No. 1). [مدخلة تمتد من ص11 إلى ص12]

٧٧ 77. — Contents — Age of accused. — The Court of Cassation requires to be satisfied that a convicted offender is not a juvenile offender within the meaning of Title I, Ch. IX, P.C. When the age of the offender is not stated in the judgment, the Court is entitled to refer to the facts of the case, to the appearance of the accused and to his occupation. If these are inconclusive, the judgment must be quashed. (Cass. 10 July 1907; No. 8).

٧٨ 78. — Contents—Date of offence.—The omission from a judgment of conviction of the date on which the offence was committed is not a substantial defect, if the Court of Cassation is able to satisfy itself, from the judgment itself, that the offence was committed within the period of prescription; e. g. when, from the findings in a judgment of conviction for the offence of bringing a false charge, it appears that the false charge related to acts alleged to have been done upon a date which is itself within that period. (Cass. 1 Feb. 1908; No. 95).

٧٩ 79. —Contents—Date of offence—Continuing offence.—Wilful omission to perform the duty imposed by art. 52, Recruiting Law, is a continuing offence and the date of such omission need not, therefore, appear, on pain of nullity, in a judgment convicting thereof under art. 121 of the said Law. (Cass. 28 March 1908, No. 121, I).

٨٠ 80. —Contents—Date of offence—Forgery and uttering.—In a judgment convicting the same person of falsifying and of uttering a document it is not a substantial defect to omit to state the date of falsification if the date of the uttering is stated. (Cass. 14 March 1908 ; No. 107, II).

٨١ 81. —Contents—Finding of guilt—Assize Court.—The finding of guilt required by art. 50 of the Assize Court Law (No. 6, 1905) is sufficiently implied by the passing of sentence without being expressly set out. (Cass. 1 Dec. 1907; No. 26, I).

٨٢ 82. —Contents—Guilty knowledge—Uttering a forgery.—In a judgment convicting the same person of falsifying and of uttering a document it is not a substantial defect to omit specifically to state that the document was uttered with the knowledge that it was false. (Cass. 14 March 1908; No. 107, II).

٨٣ 83. — Contents — Name of state representative — Markaz Tribunal. — The judgment of conviction of a Markaz Tribunal must contain, on pain of nullity, the name of the officer who, under art. 5 Markaz Tribunal Law (No. 8, 1904) exercised the powers of the state representative in the prosecution. (Trib. App. Kena, 6 Feb. 1908; No. 63).

٨٤ 84. — Contents — Particulars of offence — Attempt. — The fact that the completion of a crime was prevented by circumstances independent of the will of its author may be implied from the facts contained in a judgment convicting him of the attempt and need not, in such case, be expressly set out. (Cass. 15 Feb. 1908; No. 43).

٨٥ 85. — Contents — Particulars of offence — False information — Bad faith.—A judgment convicting of laying a false information, under art. 264 P.C., must contain, on pain of nullity, a finding that the information was laid in bad faith. (Cass. 28 March 1908 ; No. 118).