—Withdrawal—Public action: v. Public action, 114.

١٦ 16. —Public action barred—Jurisdiction—Where the prosecution of an offence is barred by lapse of time, the Criminal Court is not empowered by art. 172 C.Cr.Pr. to hear or determine the civil claimant's action for damages. His action can, in such case, be brought only before the Civil Court. (Cass. 9 Feb. 1907; No. 74, p. 58.)

—How determined; v. Appeal, 3.

١٧ 17. —Protect—Time limit.—There is no exception to the rule whereby, in case of collision at a place where he might have done so, the master is required to make his claim within 48 hours. Even where the ship has been lost the master must claim within the limited time. (App. 22 Jan. 1907; No. 76, p. 58.)

—Order—Time limit; v. Procedure, Criminal, 106.

—Proceedings—Omission to keep record; v. Procedure, Criminal, 105.

—Assistance—Arrangement: v. Judgment, 45.

—Improbation action dismissed—Compromise on appeal—Discharge from fine: v. Improbation, 35.

—Dragoman—Local subject—Consent of Egyptian Government: v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals, Restrictions on, 71.

—Uttering forgery—Prescription—“Dies a quo”; v. Prescription of Public Action, 101.

—Construction—Pledge in form of sale with right to redeem—Restriction on redemption: v. Pledge, 88.

—Jurisdiction—Action on civil contract—Agreement by guardian: v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals, Restrictions on, 73.

—Jurisdiction—Action on civil contract—Movables; v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals inter se, 62.

—Jurisdiction—Alien plaintiff: v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals, Restrictions on, 69.

—Proof—Admission—Defence in former action; v. Evidence in civil cases, 21.

—Proof of discharge—Civil and commercial contract: v. Evidence in civil cases, 22.

—Proof of discharge—Debt exceeding L.E. 10—Part payment under L.E. 10: v. Evidence in civil cases, 23.

—Proof of simulation; v. Evidence in civil cases, 25.

—Validity—Agreement to allow appeal; v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals, inter se, 60.

—Validity—Agreement as to jurisdiction—Alien plaintiff: v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals, Restrictions on, 69.

—Validity—Assignment of powers by nazir—Consent of Cadi; v. Wakf, 127.

—Validity—Gift in form of sale—Gratuitous character manifest; v. Gift, 33.

—Validity—“Lex commissoria” in contract of pledge; v. Pledge, 87.

١٨ 18. —Validity—Stifling prosecution—Illegal object.—An agreement entered into for the purpose of stifling or delaying a prosecution for arson is void, as having an illegal object. (Trib. app. Alexandria, 27 Dec. 1906; No. 17, p. 10.)

—“Penalty prescribed for police offence”—Meaning; v. Penalty 85.

—Partition—Right of way; v. Way, right of, 131.

—Preemption—Right independent of other co-owners: v. Preemption, 91.

—Preemption—Time limit: v. Preemption, 90.

—Omission to deal with: v. Judgment, 44.

١٩ 19. —Directions to judges.—The following practices are undesirable:— 1. That of imposing a fine, and, at the same time, ordering a separate sum to be paid as costs, in cases where no adequate reason for separate assessment exists. 2. That of ordering the payment of untaxed costs. 3. That of imposing a fine, or ordering costs to be paid, when passing sentence of imprisonment. (Cir. No. 9, 9 May 1906; No. 82, p. 60.)

—Notice of appeal—Death of appellant before service: v. Appeal, 8.

—Moufti, opinion of; v. Procedure, Criminal, 108.

—Revocation of judgment—Untruthful statement: v. Judgment, Revocation of, 59.

—Alien civil claimant—Public action—Jurisdiction; v. Jurisdiction of native tribunals, Restrictions on, 65.

—Action on civil contract—Jurisdiction—Defendant's domicile; v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals inter se, 62.

—Election of—Waiver—Effect on waiver of appeal: v. Appeal, 11.

—Local subject—Appointment without consent of Egyptian Government—Jurisdiction: v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals, Restriction on, 71.

—Possessory action—Conditions: v. Possessory action, 89.

٢٠ 20. —Elements—Nature of possession.—To constitute embezzlement under art. 296 there must exist one of the contracts therein enumerated. If an employee of a railway company, of whom it is no part of the duty to receive payment of money, takes a sum from another employee who had fraudulently obtained it from a passenger, he is, therefore, not punishable under that article. (Trib. App. Alexandria, 17 April 1907; No. 67, p. 48.)

—Injury to servant—Servant's own negligence: v. Master and Servant, 83.