whether the applicant has more evidence to prove this point or not. In case of failure to obtain the witness, the court must give the defendants the choice to ask for the plaintiff oath, applying the Sharia well known rule (evidence shall be submitted by those who claim and the oath shall be directed to those who deny the fact incase of lack of evidence. Also with regard to the second point, pertaining to the opponents lack of sustaining the living expenses of his daughter raised by the defense lawyer, the evidence has come short of proving this point, as the court has to ask the applicants whether they have further witnesses or if they shall they direct the oath to the opponent according to Shariah rule of evidence. The third point expressed in the Supreme Court judgment is the one regarding the consummation of marriage by the second and third applicant. The second applicant has stated that the consummation of marriage took place on 29/ 9/202. This statement was confirmed by the testimony of the first witness (the son of the opponent and the brother of the third applicant) on page 16 of the case record. It proved by admission and enough evidence that the consummation took place on 29/6/2012 and that the opponent filed the case on 29/9/2012 (before the expiration of one year from the date of consummation). Consequently the opponent request to terminate the marriage did not lapse, as the case is filled on time according to section 32 sub section 4 of the family law. It is worth noting that the information disclosed in the court of appeal decision, that the third applicant gave birth to a female child on 23/11/2013 as a result of her marriage to second applicant .The applicant did not object to the birth certificate ( defense document ). In my opinion, this would not have any effect on the matter and could not lead to denying the opponent right to claim termination of the marriage for the simple reason that the marriage was consummated on 29/9/2012 while the child birth happened after that date. His highness Ahmed Abd Almageed in his Book (The Family Law 1991) part one page 146 has elaborated on the fact of, the legislator clearly expressing that the right of the guardian to invalidate the marriage is not an everlasting right. That right would lapse in two cases; the first one is when the wife becomes pregnant and the second is when the wife gives birth. However, this lapse of time is always subject to the time of filing the guardian claim for invalidation before the expiration of one year from the date of marriage on 29/6/2012. It was certainly proved before us that the opponent has filed the case of invalidating the marriage before the lapse of one year from that date. Therefore, I concur to the Court of Appeal decision cancelling the First Instance Court decision, dismiss this objection summarily and refer the case papers to the Court of First Instance to follow the directive of this court and the Court of Appeal and pass the order if it sees fit and just. Fadiyah Ahmed Abd Agadir Supreme Court Magistrate 17/1/2016 Mustfa Hamd Abdalrahman Supreme Court Magistrate 9/2/2016 Altyb Abdalgafoor Abdalwahab Supreme Court Magistrate 20/3/2016 Final ordet Summary dismissal of the objection application Altyb Abdalgafoor Abdalwahab Supreme Court Magistrate Circuit President 20/3/2016