The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by the Law Society of Brunei Darussalam against the decision to admit a United Kingdom barrister as an Advocate and Solicitor in Brunei, ruling that the statutory requirements under the Legal Profession Act (LPA) had been satisfied.
The appeal arose from the Acting Chief Justice’s decision to admit Marie Rita Leslie, a UK-qualified barrister who is neither a citizen nor a permanent resident of Brunei. The Law Society challenged that decision on the grounds that Leslie did not meet the requirements of “active practice” and “good character” under the LPA.
In a unanimous judgment delivered by Chief Justice Dato Seri Paduka Steven Chong, with Justices of Appeal Michael Lunn and Sir Peter Gross, the Court held that the Law Society had failed to establish any error in the original decision and dismissed the appeal with no order as to costs.
On the issue of qualification, the Court examined whether Leslie met the LPA requirement that a foreign applicant must have been in active legal practice in the United Kingdom for at least seven years immediately preceding the application.
The Court found that her legal work, including remote practice undertaken during a sabbatical period, amounted to consistent and substantial engagement in legal practice.
The Court accepted evidence in the form of practising certificates and a statement from Leslie’s Head of Chambers, holding that “active practice” does not require daily courtroom work, but rather sustained professional involvement. It further held that modern legal practice permits remote work, which does not detract from its legitimacy.
The Court also rejected the Law Society’s allegations that Leslie lacked good character. The Society had argued that she breached immigration regulations by working in Brunei without a proper Employment Pass and had failed in her duty of candour in her application.
However, the Court found no evidence of dishonesty or lack of integrity. It noted that the immigration authorities had taken no enforcement action against Leslie and that imperfections in how her application was presented did not amount to misconduct.
The Court further observed that the Law Society did not apply to cross-examine Leslie on the allegations, which weakened its position.
In its judgment, the Court stressed that allegations of poor character must be supported by cogent evidence, particularly where a person’s professional integrity is at stake.
The Court also took the opportunity to outline the broader public interest considerations, stating that Brunei should adopt a welcoming approach to foreign legal practitioners who can contribute to the jurisdiction, provided that qualification and character standards are met. At the same time, it emphasised the importance of maintaining high professional standards.
Although the appeal was dismissed, the Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to impose a condition on Leslie’s admission.
This followed her subsequent withdrawal of her petition and her stated intention not to return to Brunei. The Court ordered that she may not finalise her admission without further leave of court, thereby allowing the Law Society to raise any concerns should she reapply in the future.
The Court also issued guidance to the Law Society, advising it to review its internal guidelines on certificates of good character, particularly in relation to the relationship between referees and applicants and the duration of their acquaintance. It further stated that the Society should approach admission matters fairly and objectively, likening its role to that of a “Minister of Justice” rather than a partisan objector.
The judgment was delivered on November 1, 2025, with the written grounds dated December 9, 2025.
Lawyer Wong Mew Sum of Messrs Abrahams Davidson & Co appeared for the Law Society, while lawyer S Rozaimarlenny DSLJ Haji Abdul Rahman of Messrs HLR Law Advocates & Solicitors appeared for Leslie.