that no part of it has slipped from his hand, that title has not left its owner through a sale, gift, charitable donation, or any other avenue by which property passes out of its owners’ hands, and that his witness has spoken the truth on his behalf. On that basis the judge rules for him and delivers the property to him. The same holds when he produces two witnesses: the judge makes him swear in identical fashion—namely, that he has neither sold it nor given it away, as I have just explained—without requiring him to add, “and my witness has testified truthfully.” Once he has taken the oath, the judge hands the property over to him.

If a man claims a parcel of land or a dwelling and presents a single witness, while the judge is not among those who rule on the basis of an oath together with one witness, and the claimant asks that the property be placed under judicial suspension, the judge examines the matter. Should the dwelling yield a daily rent, or the land produce crops that may soon be harvested or gathered, or be an olive grove whose pressing is imminent, or be fallow ground that might be sown and thereby lost, the whole of it is put under suspension. The person in possession is barred from disposing of it, yet he continues to collect its produce after the upright witness has testified. Every trustworthy piece of real estate—whether it generates revenue or not—is subject to suspension: revenue-bearing property is placed under receivership, while non-revenue property is merely protected against alteration. The revenue, however, always remains with the possessor until a judgment awards it to the claimant. During the period of suspension the possessor may not dig a well on the land, plant trees, or erect buildings, pleading, “Let me improve it; if the claimant prevails you can then demolish it,” for anything he builds would have to be torn down once the claimant’s right is established.

All of these measures of suspension are taken only when the claimant’s case appears sound on the strength of an upright witness or of evidence the judge has not yet verified. If the evidence offered with respect to a dwelling is inconclusive, Ibn al-Qāsim holds that the possessor may sell the property and dispose of it as he wishes; Sahnūn, however, rejects this, declaring such a sale speculative and therefore invalid.

If a man claims an animal or a slave in another man’s possession, produces one witness, and has a second witness in a different town, he is given control of the slave and the slave’s value is deposited with a trustworthy custodian until