Lord Parmoor:- This is an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court for Egypt (in Prize) of 14th April 1916. The Court rejected the claim of the appellants to forty-three bales of knotted hemp fibre, part cargo ex the steamship Derfflinger, and pronounced the bales to have belonged at the time of capture and seizure to enemies of the Crown, and, as such, subject to confiscation and condemnation. The appellants are a company incorporated under the laws of Italy, and are carrying on business in that country. The bales of knotted hemp fibre were purchased in Manilla at an inclusive price of 55,375 fr., on c.i.f. terms. The said bales were shipped to Hong Kong partly in the steamship Chinhua and partly in the steamship Wunensang and at Hong Kong were re-shipped on the German steamship Derfflinger for conveyance to the port of Genoa. The bills of lading relating to the shipments are dated respectively 29bh June and 3rd July, 1914, and were forwarded by a branch Germann and Co., of Manilla, to the house Germann and Co., of Hamburg, who forwarded them to a bank in Florence, the Credito Italiano, with, instructions to the bank to deliver the bills of lading to the appellants, against acceptance by them of a draft for 55,375 fr. drawn on the appellants by Germann and Co. of Hamburg. On 2nd December, 1914, the bank accepted the draft and thereupon forwarded the bills of lading to the appellants. On 15th October, 1914, the steamship Derfflinger way seized as prize of war and was condemned as prize by decree of the Supreme Court of Egypt (in Prize) on 20th January, 1915. It was ordered under the decree that the consideration of the cargo on board the Derfflinger should stand over, with liberty to any party interested to apply. The appellants thereupon applied to the respondent, His Majesty's Procurator in Egypt, for the delivery of the bales to them. They filed their claim in the prize Court, and asked for the release of the bales on the ground that they were neutral and the lawful owners thereof at the time of the seizure. On 14th April, 1916, judgment was delivered against the claim of the appellants and the appeal is brought against this judgment. They filed their claim in the prize Court, and asked for the release of the bales on the ground that they were neutral and the lawful owners thereof at the time of the seizure. On 14th April, 1916, judgment was delivered against the claim of the appellants and the appeal is brought against this judgment. It has been settled by their Lordships, as a principle of international law, that the question whether goods seized as prize, are enemy in character depends on property and not on risk and that the property to be looked for is the general property as opposed to any special proprietary right - The Odessa [1915] 85 L.J.P.C. 49; (1916) 1; A.C.145. and The Parchim [1917] 87 L.J.P. 18; (1918) A.C. 157. The only question, therefore, which arises in this appeal is, in whom was the general property in the goods at the time of seizure on 15th October, 1914? Their Lordships are prepared to accept the appellants' contention that the parties intended the transaction to be governed by Italian law. But it is quite clear on the evidence that the question whether and when the general property passes by virtue of a contract of sale of goods must, according to Italian law, be determined - as it is according to English law - by the intention of the parties to the contract. On the other hand, it does not appear that the Italian law has any special rules such as those recognised in the Sale of Goods Act, 1893 (56 and 57 Vict. C. 671), as to how this intention ought to be discovered. After full consideration of all the circumstances, their Lordships find themselves in agreement with the finding of his Honour Judge Grain that it was the intention of the parties to the contract that the property in the bales of knotted hemp fibre should not pass to the buyers until the draft held by the bank on behalf of Germann and Co., had been accepted. This draft had not been accepted at the date of seizure, and it follows that at that date the property in the bales was in the enemy firm Germann and Co., Hamburg, and liable to seizure and condemnation as enemy goods. Their Lordships will humbly advise His Majesty that the appeal should be dismissed with Costs. Appeal dismissed.