The Law Society will be prevented from properly vetting applications from would-be solicitors if a court ruling in favour of a human rights lawyer is allowed to stand, it was claimed yesterday. Denis Chang SC, for the society, told the Court of Final Appeal it had been put in an 'impossible position'. If the ruling of the Court of Appeal was not reversed, the society would be forced to issue final certificates of eligibility to applicants it did not regard as suitably experienced, he said. 'We say this is a serious infringement of the public duty imposed on the Law Society to regulate admissions,' said Mr Chang. 'It would mean the Law Society would, in effect, issue a certificate that is a lie.' Australian Robert Brook, 29, helped Vietnamese boat people win two major victories against the Government in the Privy Council while working in Hong Kong as a paralegal. He claims he was given a certificate that entitled him to be admitted as a solicitor on condition he passed certain exams. But after passing with 'flying colours', the Law Society refused his admission as a solicitor, arguing that he did not have broad enough experience. The society argues that the certificate given to Mr Brook is purely to enable applicants to take the exams, and it is only later that their suitable experience is considered. The Court of Appeal ruled this approach unlawful in April. The society is now challenging that decision in the top court. Philip Dykes SC, for Mr Brook, said an information package given to exam applicants led them to believe they would be admitted if they passed. Chief Justice Andrew Li Kwok-nang, Mr Justice Henry Litton, Mr Justice Kemal Bokhary, Mr Justice Charles Ching and Lord Cooke of Thorndon will rule at a later date.