IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
CIV 2157 OF 2011
IN THE MATTER OF CIV 2157 OF 2011 AND THE NULL COSTS ORDER OF JUSTICE SIMMONDS DELIVERED 12.8.2012, THE SUBJECT OF A JOINT APPLICATION BY MAURICE LAW AND NICHOLAS N CHIN IN EXPARTE JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION IN CIV 1275 OF 2012.
NICHOLAS NI KOK CHIN FIRST DEFENDANT
MAURICE FREDRICK LAW SECOND DEFENDANT
REGISTRAR OF TITLES THIRD DEFENDANT
DATE OF DOCUMENT:
16TH APRIL, 2012
FILED ON BEHALF OF: FIRST AND SECOND DEFENDANT
DATE OF FILING:
16TH APRIL, 2012
WILLIAM STREET EMAIL:
We, MAURICE FREDERICK LAW, the second defendant and NICHOLAS NI KOK CHIN, the First Defendant, in this action, humbly submit the following:
- We refer to the above subject matter and object to its taxation on the following grounds:
1.1. The decision of His Honour Justice Simmonds in CIV 2157 of 2011 is voidable or void because of His Honour’s jurisdictional errors as contained in documents filed for the judicial review that is scheduled for hearing on 18.6.2012 at (the Voidable Costs Order).
1.2. The Voidable Costs Order is based on the following facts:
1.2.1. Solicitor David Taylor together with Registrar Powell falsified the court records in CIV 1131 of 2006 in order to allow the extension of Spunter Pty Ltd Caveats on parts of the estate of Nancy Hall (the wrongs of David Taylor).
1.2.2. The Wrongs of David Taylor caused detriment of Maurice Frederick Law who is the director of Spunter Pty Ltd: Maurice lost more than $60k to David Taylor as legal fees for his dereliction of his duties to Spunter Pty Ltd (the detriment to Maurice).
1.2.3. The Wrongs of David Taylor caused the Estate of Nancy Hall to be clogged up and caused her untimely death and as a result Nicholas N Chin as the former solicitor of Nancy Hall in CIV 1142 of 2002 was burdened with the job as Salvour of parts of Nancy Estate pursuant to the former s.244 of the Legal Practice Act, 2003 (The Salvour).
Estate in terms of $2.3m was fraudulently transferred to Audrey Frances Hall as
the executor of the estate of Kenneth Duncan Hall as a result of wrongs of
David Taylor and other parties (Audrey’s fraud).
1.2.5. As a result of the Salvour and Maurice fighting the administrator of the estate of Nancy Hall Mrs. Gannaway who is represented by solicitor Chris Stokes in CIV 2157 of 2011, Audrey’s fraud is being unravelled. But there was a promise from Audrey Hall to pay the Salvour his solicitor fees of $20k in CACV 107 of 2008 that has not been kept (the Salvour fees).
1.2.6. The Salvour’s fees have escalated as a result of the recalcitrance of the Administrator in not honouring the Salvour’s fees. The escalated Salvour fees is the basis for his caveatable interests that was wrongfully removed by Justice Simmonds as a result of His Honour’s Jurisdictional errors in CIV 2157 of 2011 ( the caveatable interests of the Salvour).
1.2.7. DCJ Sweeney in DC Civ 2509 of 2002 in her judgement dated 8.11.2011, at paragraph 244 acknowledges the integrity of Spunter”s claim as the legitimate creditor of the estate of Nancy Hall in the sum of more than $145k (the Rights of Spunter).
1.2.8. The administrator of Nancy Hall’s estate as represented by Mr. Chris Stokes did not have any money to buy over the estate of Nancy Hall worth $2.3m. How come Mrs. Gannaway as that administrator is able to use Mrs. Audrey Hall’s fraud of $2.3m from the Estate of Nancy Hall to become the administrator through Mr. Chris Stokes and refusing to pay the legitimate debtors of that estate in the person of Nicholas N Chin for his Salvour’s fees and Spunter Pty Ltd as its legitimate creditor (the Fraud on the Court).
1.2.9. Spunter is the corporate body of Maurice Law and the party in dispute with the Estate of Nancy Hall. Mr. Chris Stokes is aware of this and had misled Simmonds J in CIV 2157 of 2011 and DCJ Sweeney in DC CIV 2509 of 2002. The latter is the subject matter of CACV 144 of 2011 and CACV 5 of 2012. Mr. Chris Stokes through his professional misconduct is extorting monies in the sum of $22k from the wrong party as the debt if any was owing and payable only through Spunter Pty Ltd and not through an unlawful execution of those costs orders against Maurice Law personally. Therefore, Mr. Stokes had wrongfully procured through DCJ Sweeny by misleading the court and by dishonest means and he is now trying to extort more monies from both Maurice and Nicholas N Chin for the unlawful costs orders that he had procured through Justice Simmonds in CIV 2157 of 2011 (the professional misconduct of Mr. Stokes).
1.2.10. Justice Chaney in VR 158 of 2011 had not produced the vital evidence seen by Maurice Law on 30.11.2011 before Jacqui of SAT. Maurice is taking steps to obtain this vital evidence which will show conclusively the wrongs of David Taylor to both Maurice Law and Nicholas N Chin (the SAT evidence).
- Both the Defendants have caveatable interests and therefore equitable interests in the estate of Nancy Hall and therefore the removal of those caveats by Simmonds J in CIV 2157 of 2011 on 12.8.2011 is a Jurisdictional Error which renders the decision voidable or Void and its consequent costs orders the same.
- The professional misconduct of David Taylor is being pursued through the LPCC and the same shall apply to Mr. Chris Stokes.
- We do not consent to the Bill of Costs of Mr. Chris Stokes to be taxed as it is going to be a waste of time as it shall not be unenforceable.
- All the other Voidable Costs Orders arising from the professional misconduct of David Taylor and Mr. Chris Stokes are never enforced and are not enforceable. The one which is wrongfully enforced by Chris Stokes on 29.3.2011 in the extorted sum of $22k must be returned to Mr. Maurice Law, otherwise criminal proceedings shall be instituted against Mr. Chris Stokes within 10 days.
Signature of the first defendant: Nicholas Ni Kok Chin
Signature of the Second Defendant: Maurice Frederick Law