8/8/2019 رقم لسنة 1256

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/125-6 1/2

125  6   "" 

 After examining the papers and discussion«

 As the facts - as seen from the daily proceedings and other papers - concludes that the first

respondent filed case no. 1966 for the year 1977, Civil, Giza District against her brother "the

petitioner" claiming the validity and enforcement of a testament, dated January 15, 1975,

beaqueathed to her from her mother of an amount of "one-third" of the total estate includeing all

real estates, agricultural clays. After a hearing on February 27, 1980, then, Giza Court of First

Instance ruled on the case.

 The first respondent appealed the ruling, and the defendant claimed the unconstitutionality of 

the first paragraph of Article (37) of the Bequests Act, promulgated by Law No. 71 for the year

1946, and on 13th of November, 1984 the Cairo Court of Appeal authorized for the defendant to

raise a constitutional case before the Consistutional Court.

 where as, the Act No. 71 of 1946 promulgating the Code of Bequests and enforced from the firts

of August 1946 stipulates in the first paragraph of Article (37) ² the contested article- that " a

bequest of the amount of one-third of the estate are valid to a heir and others, and is implement

 without the consent of the heirs, and valid, if exceded the limit of the one-thrid, unless authorized

by the heirs after the death of the testator "

 And where as, it shows from the modification of the constitution, which was on May 22, 1980

 That the second article now states that "Islam is the state religion and Arabic is the official

language, the principles of Islamic Sharia are the main source of legislation" after it was " Islam is

the state religion and Arabic is the official language, and the principles of Islamic Sharia is a main

source of legislation",

 And Whereas - and what was its elimination of this Court to compel the legislature to take the

principles of Islamic Sharia the main source of legislation - after amendment of Article II of the

Constitution in the manner already - do not go only to the legislation issued after the date that

imposing such an obligation ???? Islamic? AA has put in??? Violation of constitutional, and the

legislation prior to that date, it comes enforce the rule of obligation referred to for her to be

issued already before, at the time was not the limitation contained such an obligation exists, and

enforceable, and, therefore, such legislation be free from this limitation, which is the focus of 

8/8/2019 رقم لسنة 1256

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/125-6 2/2

constitutional oversight.

Since that arrangement as they voiced Since the building appeal contrary to paragraph one of 

 Article 37 of the Wills Act, promulgated by Law No. 71 for the year 1946 to the second article of 

the Constitution based on that article challenged by contrary to the rules of inheritance according 

to Islamic principles that have made them the second article of the Constitution, the main source

of legislation, and the enrollment decision under this article - as amended on May 22, 1980,

containing the bind the legislature not to violate the principles of Islamic law - does not come the

realization on the legislation preceding it, as explained above, and the first paragraph of Article 37

of the Wills referred to Mai of the right Any amendment after the date referred to, and then, the

obituary it, and condition of these - with violating Article II of the Constitution - and whatever

the opinion in conflict with the principles of Islamic law - be in the other place, which should be

 with the government to dismiss the case.