—Nazir—Means of fulfilling duties—Jurisdiction; v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals, Restrictions on, 76.

—Execution of judgment—Administrative authorities—Jurisdiction; v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals, Restrictions on, 74.

—Execution of judgment—Irregularity—Claim arising from—Jurisdiction; v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals, Restrictions on, 75.

—Judgment for payment of alimony—Administrative execution; v. Execution, 26.

—Proceedings before Cadi—Prescription of public action—Interruption; v. Prescription of public action, 100.

—Mausoleum—Means of fulfilling duties—Jurisdiction; v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals, Restrictions on, 76.

—Wakf—Assignment of powers—Subsequent lease by Nazir—Validity; v. Wakf, 127.

—Wakf—Liability for erroneous payment; v. Wakf, 128, 129.

—Omission—Same facts proved by sworn evidence; —v. Procedure, Criminal, 112.

—Modification equivalent to refusal; v. Evidence in civil cases, 24.

—Effect of, on previous appeal; v. Appeal, 6.

—Judgment wrongly designated by default; v. Judgment by default, 55.

—Omission of grounds in declaration; v. Judgment by default, 56.

—Waiver of, not pleaded—Effect on waiver of appeal; v. Appeal, 10.

—Right of way; v. Way, right of, 131.

٨٤ Ownership contested before another Court.—Judgment will not be given in a partition suit during the pendency, before another Court, of an action in which the ownership of the property the subject of the suit is contested. (Sum. Trib. Facous, 4 March 1907; No. 81, p. 60.)

—Lawfully constituted authority—Guardian, legality of appointment—Court of urgent measures—Jurisdiction; v. Jurisdiction of Native Tribunals inter se, 64.

—Lawfully constituted authority—Personal statute—Agreement to administer estate—Mandate; v. Mandate, 81.

٨٥ —"Penalty for police offence"—Reference to art. 12 P.C.—By providing in certain special regulations that persons found guilty of a breach thereof shall suffer the penalties imposed for police offences it is intended to refer to P. C. art. 12, and such regulations cannot, consequently, be deemed without any prescribed penalty within the meaning of P.C. art. 348 3°. (Cir. No. 1 of 6 Feb. 1907; No. 95, p. 68.)

—Judgment by default—Non-execution—Instructions to execute; v. Judgment by default, 57.

٨٦ —Abandonment of possession—Loss of rights of pledgee.—Where the pledgee of an immovable abandons possession thereof and another creditor obtains its sale, the pledgee is deemed to have waived his right to be paid out of the proceeds of such sale in preference to other persons. (Sum. Trib. Damanhour, 12 June 1906; No. 9, p. 3.)

٨٧ —Lex commissoria—Subsequent purchase by pledgor.—Where a contract of pledge contains the clause (lex commissoria) prohibited by art. 543 C.C., and the debtor, believing his creditor to have become owner of the thing pledged, purchases it from him, such sale is void. (App. 1 May 1906; No. 4, p. 2.)

٨٨ —Sale with right to redeem—Restriction on redemption.—Where, in a contract of pledge, made in the form of a sale with right of redemption, the parties have agreed that the redemption shall not take place within a fixed time, the Court may infer, from the terms of the contract, that such agreement was made for the benefit of the creditor, so that the debtor cannot redeem before the lapse of the specified time. (Sum. Trib. Mit-Ghamr, 7 Jan. 1907; No. 35, p. 20.)

—"Penalty prescribed for police offence"—Meaning; v. Penalty, 85.

—Abandonment by pledgee—Loss of rights; v. Pledge, 86.

—Ejection without violence—Possessory action—Conditions; v. Possessory action, 89.

—Order to deliver—Appeal—Protection of possession; v. Appeal, 5.

٨٩ —Conditions.—A party who seeks to recover possession of land must shew that his possession was not vitiated. It follows that, where he has been ejected without violence, he is not entitled to recover if he fail to shew that he possessed both publicly and animo domini. (Trib. App. Cairo, 22 Jan. 1907; No. 42, p. 27.)

—Infant plaintiff—Guardian vendor—Guardian ad litem; v. Infant, 40.

٩٠ —Co-owner—Limit of time.—Art. 462 C.C. is repealed in so far as it is inconsistent with the Preemption Law of 23 March 1901. Thus, where a co-heir sells his share to a third party, the other co-heirs lose their right to redeem such share if they have not begun to enforce it within the time limited by art. 19 of the said Law. (App. 31 March 1906; No. 13, p. 9.)

٩١ —Co-owner—Right independent of other co-owners.—The co-owner of neighbouring land can, without the concurrence of the other co-owners, exercise the right of preemption. (Sum. Trib. Kafr-el-Zayat, 3 June 1907; No. 119, p. 84.)

٩٢ —Indivisible right.—The right of preemption is indivisible and cannot therefore be exercised in respect of a part only of the property sold. (Sum. Trib. Mellawy, 22 Oct. 1907; No. 116, p. 84.)

٩٣ —Payment delayed—Fruits.—A preemptor who has not tendered the price of the immovable, cannot claim an indemnity for the fruits which it has produced before delivery; since it would be inequitable that he should profit both by the fruits and by the interest on the purchase money. (Sum. Trib. Minia-el-Kamh, 29 Nov. 1906; No. 33, p. 19.)

٩٤ —Proceedings set aside—Time limit for renewal.—When a preemption suit has been instituted within the limited period, but, on default by the plaintiff, the proceedings are set aside, the claim cannot be renewed if 30 days have elapsed since the service of the declaration of intention to preempt. The setting aside has the effect of avoiding all the procedure, including the process instituting the suit. (Trib. App. Tanta, 15 Jan. 1907; No. 112, p, 82.)

٩٥ —Sale by preemptor before final judgment.—The Court will not set aside a sale by a preemptor effected after judgment in first instance had been given in his favour, on the ground that he sold before final judgment. (App. 11 March 1906; No. 60, p. 45.)

—Wakf—Rents and Profits; v. Wakf, 130.

—Non-Execution—Instructions to execute; v. Judgment by default, 57.

—Civil claim—Jurisdiction; v. Civil claim, 16.

٩٨ —Interruption—Adjournment of action pending civil proceedings.—Where, in a prosecution, an adjournment is ordered pending the decision of a preliminary question by the Civil Court, the time limited for the prescription of the public action does not begin to run until such Court has given judgment. (Sum. Trib. Minia el Kamh, 30 June 1906; No. 8, p. 3.)

٩٩ —Interruption—Civil investigation.—An investigation ordered to be made by the civil Court does not interrupt the prescription of the public action. (Sum. Trib. Simbillawain, 1 July 1906; No. 20, III, p. 11.)