SHARIAsource

This is an enactment of May 1, 1952, "to amend the law relating to the constitution and powers of the civil and criminal courts." It reconstitutes Brunei's court system, making certain revisions to the Courts Enactment of 1908 (but retaining the same basic structure). See Section 17(2) (p.37) for the Religious Council, unmentioned in the Enactment of 1908. The Enactment names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, "establish[es] a code of criminal procedure." It appears to have borrowed certain material from a "corresponding Code in the Colony of Sarawak." It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, "establish[es] a code of criminal procedure." It appears to have borrowed certain material from a "corresponding Code in the Colony of Sarawak." It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of April 25, 1951, "regulate[s] the application in the State of the Common Law of England, the doctrines of equity and statutes of general application." It says that the common law of England, doctrines of equity and statutes of general application will be in force in the State, but subjects them to "such qualifications as local circumstances and native customs render necessary." It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, "establish[es] a code of criminal procedure." It appears to have borrowed certain material from a "corresponding Code in the Colony of Sarawak." It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, "establish[es] a code of criminal procedure." It appears to have borrowed certain material from a "corresponding Code in the Colony of Sarawak." It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, "establish[es] a code of criminal procedure." It appears to have borrowed certain material from a "corresponding Code in the Colony of Sarawak." It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, "establish[es] a code of criminal procedure." It appears to have borrowed certain material from a "corresponding Code in the Colony of Sarawak." It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, "establish[es] a code of criminal procedure." It appears to have borrowed certain material from a "corresponding Code in the Colony of Sarawak." It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This agreement between Great Britain and Brunei announces that Brunei "shall remain an independent state, under the protection of Great Britain." It confers certain powers over Brunei's internal administration on the British government, and entitles British citizens in Brunei to certain rights. It is signed by Hugh Low, British Resident at Perak, and bears the seal of the Sultan of Brunei.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, establishes a code of criminal law, "based on" the Indian Penal Code. It defines certain offenses and prescribes punishments. It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, "establish[es] a code of criminal procedure." It appears to have borrowed certain material from a "corresponding Code in the Colony of Sarawak." It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, establishes a code of criminal law, "based on" the Indian Penal Code. It defines certain offenses and prescribes punishments. It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, establishes a code of criminal law, "based on" the Indian Penal Code. It defines certain offenses and prescribes punishments. It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, establishes a code of criminal law, "based on" the Indian Penal Code. It defines certain offenses and prescribes punishments. It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

The Sultan of Brunei enacted this document on March 31, 1908, with the approval of M.S.H. MacArthur, British Resident of Brunei. It establishes the structure and jurisdiction of Brunei's courts, the maximum penalties they can impose, and the codes that they are to follow. Most of these were codes already in force in the Straits Settlements or Federated Malay States.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, establishes a code of criminal law, "based on" the Indian Penal Code. It defines certain offenses and prescribes punishments. It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This enactment of May 1, 1952, establishes a code of criminal law, "based on" the Indian Penal Code. It defines certain offenses and prescribes punishments. It names neither the Sultan nor the British Resident, and does not specify an author or enacting authority.

This case was brought by the parents of Maria Huberdina Hertogh for the following reliefs: that Hertogh's marriage to Inche Mansoor Adabi be declared void and of no effect; that Inche Mansoor Adabi be ordered to deliver Hertogh to the custody of the Consul-General for the Netherlands; that the Consul-General for the Netherlands be free to restore Hertogh to her parents; and that Inche Mansoor Adabi and Amina Binte Mohamed be prohibited from removing Hertogh from the jurisdiction of the court pending the hearing of the application. The Court ruled that it did have jurisdiction to declare the marriage void, that the marriage was invalid, and that Hertogh should be returned to the custody of her mother.

This appeal against the ruling reported in Malaya Law Journal XVII 12 was made on the grounds that the Court had no jurisdiction to declare void the marriage between Maria Huberdina Hertogh and Inche Mansor Adabi, that Hertogh was a Muslim "in fact and in law," and that her marriage to Inche Mansor Adabi was valid. The Court ruled that the declaration of the illegality of the marriage was beyond the Court's jurisdiction, but that Hertogh was domiciled in Holland. As Inche Mansor Adabi had not proven that the marriage was valid by the laws of Holland, the Court had rightly ordered custody of Hertogh to be returned to her parents.