AI en Translation, Pages 1-25
Page 7
Baghdad Personal Status Court
No. 952/24 Sh
Judge - Mr. Abdul Rahman Al-Bazzaz
On March 3, 1952, Ezra bin Menachem bin Saleh Daniel (known) as (Ezra Menachem Daniel) passed away
And his inheritance was limited to his two cousins, namely Khedhouri (nicknamed Frederick) and Salim, the sons of Sassoon Saleh Daniel, and there is no heir
Except for them, according to the statement submitted by the Mukhtar of the Al-Senak neighborhood dated 4/8/1952 and supported by the testimony of each of Daoud
Harun Daoud Nawi and Ibrahim Moshi Harun Khalasji. Therefore, the inheritance issue is correct from two shares for each of
the sons of his uncle, Khedhouri (nicknamed Frederick) and Salim, the sons of Sassoon Saleh Daniel, one share in accordance with the legal obligation and upon
the request of the heirs, this legal distribution was organized. Written on 4/21/1952.
Kingdom of Iraq
50 Fils
True copy
18
Personal Status
⟦Court⟧
First Clerk
Page 8
1943/34 S
Judge Mr. Hussein Al-Mu'min
Heskel Menachem Daniel passed away on 1/14/1943 and his inheritance was restricted to his older brother Ezra Menachem
Daniel and he has no heir other than him according to the statement submitted by the Mukhtar of the Al-Senak neighborhood supported by the testimony
of both Victor Dawood and Ezra Meir Baruch and the heir Ezra, and accordingly the matter of inheritance was validated in one share by the brother Ezra
Menachem Daniel, in accordance with the legal obligation and based on the statement submitted and the request of the heir Ezra Menachem Daniel
aforementioned, this distribution of inheritance was organized on 3/26/1943
Judge of Personal Status in Baghdad
⟦stamp⟧
Copy ⟦illegible⟧
⟦signature⟧
Page 11
The Lawyer
Sabri Al-Zubaidi
Al-Saadoun Street - Al-Samin Building
Near Al-Nasr Square
Telephone { Office: 83345
Residence: 34262
Baghdad: 3 / 12 / 968
The Honorable Judge of the Karrada Court of First Instance
Applicant for Urgent Inspection: Hasso United Markets Company - Represented by its General Agent, Lawyer Sabri Al-Zubaidi
Respondents for Inspection: 1- The Chairman of the Administrative Committee for Iraqi Jews, in addition to his position.
2- The Secretary-General for the Supervision and Management of Properties of Jews Deprived of Iraqi Citizenship, in addition to his position.
Grounds for the Request:
My client has leased from the first respondent for urgent inspection,
in addition to his position, the building numbered 42 E / 233 located in the Al-Sinak district (formerly the building of ⟦Ezra⟧ Menachem
Daniel) for a period of five years starting from 10 / 11 / 966 until 9 / 11 / 971 with an annual
rent of 7500/- Dinars according to the two lease contracts dated 10 / 1 / 966 and
10 / 11 / 969, for use as a warehouse for commercial goods and for the maintenance of electrical appliances and others.
It was stipulated in the two aforementioned contracts that my client undertakes to spend no less than 1200/- Dinars
on the leased building from its own funds for the purpose of constructing, establishing, and repairing some of its sections to become
suitable for its business requirements, without having the right to claim back from the lessor what was spent in this
regard, nor having the right to remove or take away what was added to the building upon the expiration of the contract period
and the evacuation of the leased property, or to demand any compensation of any kind from the lessor. Indeed, it has spent no less
than 2000/- Dinars for the aforementioned purposes from its own funds.
It is worth noting that the second respondent for urgent inspection has seized
the leased building and requested in his letter No. 26653 dated 4 / 11 / 968 its evacuation and delivery
⟦to him⟧ based on Law No. 64 of 967 on the grounds that its ownership belongs to...
Therefore, I request the notification of the respondents for urgent inspection with the inspection summons and the appointment
of a day and the selection of an expert by the honorable court to estimate the cost of the constructions, installations, and repairs
in the leased building and to grant permission to remove and dismantle those structures and installations in the event that it is decided
to vacate the leased building later, in order to preserve my client's rights from loss.
Please accept the highest respect.
Lawyer Sabri Al-Zubaidi
General Agent for the Applicant of the ⟦Urgent⟧ Inspection
2 / 12 / 968
Page 12
-1 Copy of the General Secretariat letter No. 11224 dated 1968/5/15
-2 Copy of the Administrative Committee letter No. 218 / 68 dated 68/5/5
-3 Copy of the Administrative Committee letter No. 28/26 dated 68/5/24
-4 Copy of the Ministry of Justice letter No. 1/7/182 dated 68/5/20
-5 Copy of the endowment deed (Waqf) of Ezra Menachem Daniel No. 245/22 dated 43/2/25
-6 Copy of the endowment deed " " transferring guardianship to the Administrative Committee No. 941 55
-7 " " (Haq Menachem) including Ezra Menachem No. 244/124 dated 44/9/10
-8 Copy of the endowment deed (Haq Menachem) transferring guardianship to the Administrative Committee No. 748 55 and its date
-9 Internal regulations of the Council regarding Ezra Menachem
-10 Ministry of Justice letter 1/7/182 dated 68/5/22 (The Council rules to vacate the house and hand over the endowment)
-11 Ministry of Justice letter 1/7/181 dated 68/7/7 (Codification decision)
-12 Order of the Ministry of Justice appointing the committee
-13 Ministry of Justice instructions for the year 1958 (Administrative Council for Jews and Karaites)
-14 Law No. 24 of 1927
-15 " " 10 of 1928
-16 Mosaic Community Law
-17 Please review Laws 109 and 167 of 1962 from the collection
Page 18
Baghdad Conciliation Court:
The Judge - Mr.: ⟦line⟧
File Number: / / 19
Date: / / 197
( 5 )
And consequently requested the dismissal of the lawsuit.
The plaintiff's attorney was tasked with specifying the amount of funds his client received from the endowments referred to in
the second paragraph of the lawsuit petition, and for which he waived the claim in his memorandum dated
4/19/969 at the present time. The plaintiff's attorney replied that his client is ignorant of the amount of this yield, and
it was finally determined to be five thousand dinars. Both parties repeated their statements, and since nothing remains to be said, the conclusion
of the hearing was announced and read publicly.
The Decision
Upon contemplation and scrutiny of the parties' defenses, it has become clear to this court that the plaintiff's lawsuit in his
official capacity was initially centered on two points: the first relates to preventing the defendant's opposition in his
official capacity to the plaintiff in his capacity as a trustee in managing the affairs of the endowed properties, which are 4/1/12, 9/1/166, 1/1/
212, 5/212, 4/212, 3/212, and 1/166 located in the Al-Sinak district, which were endowed according to
the deed issued by the Personal Status Court under number 134/44 Sharia, and the endowed properties located
in the Bab al-Agha district in Baghdad, which are the Khan sequence 1/57, Khan sequence 4/57, and the five
shops sequence 1172, 1160, 1188, 47, and 49, which were endowed according to the deed issued
by the Personal Status Court under number 23/45 Sharia. The issued panel of the Court of Cassation of Iraq
previously, by its decision number 187/General Panel/971 dated 9/25/1971, overturned the decision of this court
dated 6/25/1970, which ruled to dismiss the plaintiff's lawsuit and considered the properties referred to above as private
property for failure to observe the legally prescribed method for transferring ownership in real estate, including the endowment. The argument
of the General Panel in its decision referred to above was that the endowment is a system derived from Islamic Sharia
and it differs from full ownership, and that the mere issuance of the two Sharia deeds referred to above does not require
registering the endowments in the specialized land registry offices, and that it appeared to it (the General Panel of the Court of Cassation) through
the documents and evidence presented in the lawsuit and from the proceedings that the plaintiff in his official capacity on behalf of
the endower (Ezra Menachem Daniel) and the trustee began managing these referred-to endowments according to
the endower's condition until 5/15/968 when the defendant in his official capacity took possession of the
mentioned properties, and that this legal possession was not interrupted. Since the decision of the General Panel referred to above
must be followed according to the last sentence of the second paragraph of Article (215) of the Civil Procedure Code, it was decided to rule
to prevent the opposition of the defendant in his official capacity to the plaintiff in his official capacity in managing the affairs of the properties
( 6 )
⟦illegible⟧
The Judge
Page 19
Baghdad Conciliation Court
The Judge - Mr. ⟦line⟧
Republic of Iraq
File Number / / 19
Date / / 197
( 4 )
The second [paragraph] of Article ( 121 ) thereof explicitly stipulated the necessity of following the specific rules for each type of
types of dispositions in real estate, including (Waqf). The plaintiff's attorney appealed the aforementioned judgment and requested its reversal.
The judgment was returned reversed by the General Assembly of the Iraqi Court of Cassation by its decision No. 187 / General Assembly /
971 dated 15 / 9 / 971, ruling (that Waqf is a system derived from the provisions of Islamic Sharia,
and it differs from full ownership in some of its provisions, and reference must be made to the provisions of Islamic Sharia which
determined that the Waqf is considered binding upon its valid establishment, and the binding nature of this Waqf and the removal of the founder's ownership from it was confirmed
by the issuance of the two Sharia deeds for it from the Personal Status Court. The binding nature and completion of the Waqf do not depend on
the registration of the endowments in the specialized Land Registry departments, and the period of limitation preventing ⟦from⟧ hearing the Waqf lawsuit according to
the provisions of Islamic Sharia, as well as the indication of Article 1/1282 of the Civil Code and what has been settled by
the Iraqi judiciary, is thirty-six years). Both parties were summoned for litigation, and the plaintiff's attorney requested to follow
the decision of the General Assembly of the Iraqi Court of Cassation. As for the defendant's attorney, he submitted his brief dated
28 / 11 / 971, in which he clarified: First, ruling that the plaintiff shall bear the expenses and attorney fees regarding
the second part of the lawsuit, which the plaintiff's attorney waived in the session of 19 / 4 / 969 related
to the request to prevent opposition regarding the amounts collected by the plaintiff. Second, the defendant's attorney requested the joinder of
the Land Registry Director as a third party in the lawsuit to complete the litigation ⟦so⟧ the plaintiff's action in that regard makes
the litigation incomplete. 3- That the two deeds stipulated that the yield of the Waqf be spent on the poor of the sect, and
it is known that most of the poor of the sect, if not all, have had their Iraqi citizenship revoked and have left
the country, and none of the members of the sect remain except the wealthy among them. Therefore, the defendant is responsible
for managing the funds of those whose Iraqi citizenship was revoked, including the yield obtained from the aforementioned endowments.
(4) That the cassation decision went ⟦in⟧ its reasoning for the decision to state that Waqf is a system derived from the provisions of
Islamic Sharia, but what the aforementioned court overlooked is that Sharia provisions must
be referred to regarding ⟦official⟧ Waqf in cases where there are no provisions in positive laws ⟦positive⟧ that conflict
with the provisions of Sharia. However, if such provisions exist, they must be referred to even if they conflict
with the provisions of Islamic Sharia, as they are considered an exception to those provisions. In this case, we find
that there are legal provisions that mandated the registration of Waqf in the Land Registry, and that there are other legal provisions that made
the period of limitation ( 15 ) years for all Sharia deeds, including Waqf deeds, and that these
legal provisions are not considered an exception to the provisions mentioned in Islamic Sharia.
⟦illegible stamp⟧
⟦signature⟧
( 5 )
Page 20
Baghdad Court of First Instance
Case Number / / 196
Republic of Iraq
( 3 )
Multiple different requests in one summons, as each subject of these three requests constitutes
a subject for an independent lawsuit according to the provisions of Paragraph ( 1 ) of Article ( 24 ) of the Civil Procedure Code
Old Law, therefore it was requested to assign the plaintiff to limit his lawsuit to one of these requests and disregard
the other requests. Finally, the plaintiff's reliance on the two aforementioned arguments, which have been
subject to the statute of limitations preventing the hearing of the lawsuit as defined by the Civil Law, which established a rule
General and applicable to all lawsuits whose hearing is prohibited after the lapse of the period specified therein, and if the law
intended to exempt Waqf lawsuits from that general rule, it would have explicitly stated so <del>77/1931</del>
as it does for some other types of lawsuits. Therefore, the defendant's attorney requested the dismissal of the lawsuit -
and charging the plaintiff with costs and attorney's fees. In the session of 19 / 4 / 1969, the plaintiff's attorney requested in
his response brief to disregard the claim for amounts collected by the defendant from these endowments
and to limit the lawsuit to the other points of the lawsuit. Both parties repeated their statements ⟦witnessed⟧ by the briefs, and on the date of
18 / 4 / 1970, this court had issued a decision stipulating that this lawsuit be considered delayed
and assigning the plaintiff to file a lawsuit to support the aforementioned arguments, which have been issued for a period exceeding
fifteen years ⟦and no one⟧ applied to register them in the Land Registry (Tabu) according to Article ( 66 ) of the Land Registry System
of 1959 and based on the third paragraph of Article ( 14 ) of the Enforcement Law, as it is not possible to execute
these two arguments in the Land Registry in this state <del>so</del> and in view of the defendant's attorney's disapproval of the court on
this decision, he appealed it before the Court of Cassation of Iraq and it was returned overturned by decision No. 45 / Second Civil Rights
Urgent / 970 and today on 6 / 5 / 1970, which included the necessity of considering the lawsuit based on ⟦documents⟧
the submitted documents, whether for acceptance or rejection, and this court followed the cassation decision and then issued its ruling
dated 25 / 6 / 1970, which judged these properties to be absolute private property and dismissed the plaintiff's lawsuit
and charged him with costs and attorney's fees for the defendant's attorney. The court clarified in its judgment that it sees
from the evidence presented before it that as long as these properties are registered in the Land Registry as absolute private property -
and have not been registered as Waqf, and whereas the registration of the real estate as Waqf is one of the original real rights ( -
Art. 68 ) Civil, and since the law has prescribed a specific form for the disposal of real estate and considered that part of
public order according to Article ( 90 ) in conjunction with the third paragraph of Article ( 127 ) Civil, and also -
Article ( 66 ) of the Land Registry System of 1959 has mandated the necessity of registering the real estate Waqf, then Paragraph
( Continued 4 )
⟦illegible⟧
Page 21
Baghdad Court of First Instance
Case Number / / 196
( 2 )
Daniel, whose Iraqi citizenship was revoked, by the defendant's seizure, in addition to his official capacity, of these
properties, considering them to be pure freehold properties, and requesting the occupants to pay the rents to him
and that all sums pertaining to these endowments be paid to him from the date the citizenship was revoked from these two
heirs ⟦until⟧ the date he seized them. Whereas this action taken by the defendant has no basis
legally or Sharia-wise, since the endowment in question is established by the two aforementioned documents, therefore it is not permissible
to interfere with the plaintiff regarding the said endowment. The law did not require a specific form for the endowment's validity,
nor did it require the registration of the endowed real estate in the Land Registry Office as a condition of the contract or its execution, but rather
it is sufficient for its formation and completion that a statement is issued by the endower regarding a property subject to its judgment and fulfilling the conditions of
validity. Furthermore, the claim of the defendant, in addition to his official capacity, regarding the lapse of time over the two aforementioned
legal deeds, has no basis in Sharia or law, nor in the facts of these two deeds, because the statute of limitations in endowments
according to the provisions of Islamic Sharia is (36) years, and since no more than (12) years have passed since them,
there is no basis for the statute of limitations in any way whatsoever. Therefore, the plaintiff's attorney requested to prevent the defendant's interference, in addition
to his official capacity, in his capacity as the trustee over the administration of these endowments, and to compel him to hand over all the endowments
he seized, vacant of occupants, and to prevent his interference also in the registration of the mentioned endowments
as an endowment ⟦in⟧ the Land Registry Department. Secondly, to prevent his interference also regarding the sums collected by the plaintiff
from these endowments, which he is now demanding be returned to him, because they are the yield of these endowments and were spent according to
the conditions of the endower, and to sentence him to court costs and attorney's fees.
Trial Proceedings
⟦line⟧
On the day appointed for the hearing, the attorneys of both parties attended, and the hearing proceeded in person and in public. The plaintiff's attorney repeated
the claim summons and requested judgment according to the claim. As for the response of the defendant's attorney in his memorandum dated
16 / 4 / 1969, it is summarized as follows: since these mentioned properties were registered in the
Land Registry records as pure freehold in the names of the Jews whose Iraqi citizenship was revoked, Salim and Khaddouri, sons of Sassoon Della
Daniel, after they had inherited them from their deceased legator, Ezra Menachem Daniel; and that the plaintiff's conduct
in addition to his official capacity was contrary to the law because his client proceeded by his judgment to dispose of these properties and seized
and managed them himself; and that the plaintiff had objected to that, so the subject of the dispute was referred to the State Council (Diwan
al-Tadween al-Qanuni), which issued its decision dated 28 / 7 / 1968, and it was up to the plaintiff to file the lawsuit
to confirm the endowment and rule on its validity on one hand, and on the other hand, that the plaintiff may not combine
To be followed / . . .
⟦illegible⟧
Page 22
Baghdad Court of First Instance
Case Number: 2618 / B / 1968
The Baghdad Court of First Instance was formed on 5/2/1968 by its judge, Mr. ⟦Al-Shabib⟧
Authorized to adjudicate in the name of the people, and issued its following ruling:
Plaintiff — Chairman of the Administrative Committee for Iraqi Jews / his representative, attorney Salman Bayat
Defendant — Secretary General for the Supervision and Administration of the Property of Jews Stripped of Iraqi Citizenship
His representative, attorney Abdul-Ghani Matar
Summary of the Case
The facts of the case are summarized as the plaintiff’s representative, in his official capacity, filed this lawsuit claiming that (Ezra Menahem
Daniel) had endowed (waqf) his properties located in the Al-Senak neighborhood in Baghdad, numbered 4/1/12, 4/166, 1/
212, 5/212, 4/216, 3/212, and 1/166, in accordance with the conditions organized by the deed
issued by the Personal Status Court in Baghdad under number 134/944 on 10/9/944.
Then he again endowed his properties located in the Bab al-Agha neighborhood in Baghdad, which are the khan sequence 2/57 and the khan
sequence 4/57 and the five shops sequence 1172, 1190, 1188, 47, and 49, according to
the deed issued by the Personal Status Court in Baghdad under number 33/945 on 25/1/45.
In both of the aforementioned deeds, he stipulated that their revenues be spent to establish charitable institutions and institutes —
health, cultural, and vocational — to aid the poor of the Mosaic community according to the aspects and conditions recorded therein, and he reserved
for himself the trusteeship (Tawliya) as long as he was alive, and after him it would automatically pass to the Lay Council and whoever legally represents it
in the event that he did not appoint a trustee over the endowments during his lifetime. The endower (Ezra) continued to manage
the affairs of these endowments himself when he was alive, and when he passed away in 1952, and given that he did not appoint
a trustee for the management of his endowments, the trusteeship passed to the Lay Council according to the endower's condition, and the
aforementioned Council continued to manage the endowed properties according to the endower's condition until the Administrative Committee for the -
Israeli community in Baghdad took the place of the Lay Council by order of the Ministry of Justice numbered 1144 and dated
14/11/153. The aforementioned Committee obtained a deed from the Personal Status Court in Baghdad numbered
1 Sh / 955 and dated 28/7/955 as the trustee over the mentioned endowment, and the mentioned Committee continued
in that since 1954 without opposition from any party whatsoever until the plaintiff was surprised by the defendant issuing
his letter numbered 11224 and dated 15/5/1968 claiming that these properties under discussion
are not endowed simply because they are still registered in the Land Registry Office (Tapu) in the names of their owners Heskel and Ezra and my lords
Menahem Daniel, and since they have both passed away and their heirs are their cousins Salim and Khedhouri, sons of Sassoon.
( 2 )
⟦illegible⟧
The Judge
Page 24
- 2 -
4 - The property tax was not ratified and we were anticipating the issuance of a law repealing the Vacant Land Tax Law. And it was indeed repealed.
5 - Then the Land Registry Department stopped completing the transactions.
6 - We have received notice and have the expertise, and it is possible to proceed with completing the transaction now.
⟦Rashid⟧
⟦2/1/1968⟧
Page 25
— 2 —
21 - Sequence map 517/224
22 - Map of stadium plots
23 - Title deeds (Tabu) of stadium plots
Baghdad 26 / 7 / 54 AD
Assistant Trustee of the Ezra Daniel Endowments
Ezra Daniel
⟦illegible⟧