Monday, July 22, 2013

BANKRUPTCY RACKET FOR HIGH COURT BY DR. JOHN WILSON

Bankruptcy RACKET for High Court
Inbox
x

John Wilson
1:20 PM (2 hours ago)
to Wilsons
David Lombe,
President,
Insolvency Practitioners Association,
Level 5,
33 Erskine Street,
Sydney.
 
 
Dear David Lombe,
 
Re: The BANKRUPTCY RACKET operating in Australia.
 
This email is to inform you that the shocking injustices caused by the operation of the BANKRUPTCY RACKET is on its way to the HIGH COURT where we will be demanding that the case be by TRIAL BY JURY.
 
Below are 2 items you should be aware of. the first is a copy of the 78B NOTICE and the second is a leaflet on the subject.
 
I would like an appointment to come and discuss the situation with you and your Board of Directors because your members are heavily involved and need to be told the TRUTH.
 
In Australia, the RULE OF LAW is that "No free man shall be taken indeed imprisoned, or exiled or outlawed, or dispossessed, or destroyed in any way, nor shall we pass over him nor send over him, unless by the lawful judgment of his equals which is the law of the land". To confirm this, I suggest your members visit the MAGNA CARTA MONUMENT in Canberra's Parliamentary Triangle.
 
A "racket" is described as "an organized illegal activity, such as bootlegging or the extortion of money from legitimate business people by threat orviolence; a dishonest scheme, trick, business, activity, etc. " and the way the BANKRUPTCY RACKET works is explained  in the items below.
 
This BANKRUPTCY RACKET can be eliminated and your organization ought to be at the forefront, demanding it be done.
 
When a bankruptcy is voluntarily and knowingly entered into, then your members are expected to carry our their responsibilities with honesty and understanding.
 
But when a bankruptcy is forced upon someone through the dishonest scheme set up by repugnant and diabolical "Acts of Parliament" which are totally ultra vires and savagely imposed by the judiciary, that is intolerable.
 
The remedy is easily achieved simply be enforcing the RULE OF LAW (see above).
 
Yours sincerely,
John Wilson.
Chairman, Australian Common Law Party.
Educating People to Defend their Rights.
Mobile phone: 0401 413 650.
 
*******************************
 
ITEM #1: 78B NOTICE OF A CONSTITUTIONAL MATTER
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
DISTRICT REGISTRY: NEW SOUTH WALES
DIVISION: GENERAL

                                                          Case No:  NSD1283/2013                               
BETWEEN:           Milovan Stankovic
                                Applicant

and                        The Hills Shire Council and others
                                Respondents


NOTICE OF A CONSTITUTIONAL MATTER


1.     The Defendant gives notice that these proceedings involve a matter arising under the Constitution or involving its interpretation within the meaning of Section 78B of the Judiciary Act 1903.

2.     In these proceedings, I seek the vindication of the inalienable Right of a Freeman-on-the-Land to Trial by Jury in any action in any Court of Australia, which is of National Importance and a substantive Constitutional Matter under Chapter III of the Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia Act (63 & 64 Victoria, Chapter 12) [9th July 1900].

3.     These proceedings are a prosecution by me against various parties responsible to perpetrating a conspiracy to defraud me of my property at Lot B President Road, Kellyville, NSW 2155.

4.     The Constitutional Matter raised in these proceedings is a re-visit to the Boilermakers’ Case, Citation: (1956)94 CLR 254. ... R v Kirby; Ex parte Boilermakers' Society of Australia. The High Court Of Australia ruled that astatutory body that is not a court has no judicial authority and cannot act judicially. An example being the State Debt Recovery Office (SDRO) of New South Wales Australia cannot impose any judgement or penalty or fines, which can only be done by a court. The SDRO is not a court, instead is a private corporation conducting business/commerce (a statutory body). So the cancelling of car licenses and registrations at the direction of the SDRO to the Road and Traffic Authority (RTA) of New South Wales, Australia (another private corporation conducting business/commerce) is unlawful.

5.     This scenario is replicated here because the Insolvency and Trustee Services Australia, having an A.B. N. of63 384 330 717 is Statutory Body  and NOT a Chapter III Court and had NO jurisdiction to impose any penalties or forfeitures upon me in the name of “Bankruptcy” or attach any label to my name that I was in any way a “bankrupt” person who could not pay my debts. Also, it must be pointed out that I had NO DEBT towards the Baulkham Hills Shire Council as a result of a case in the Land & Environment Court where the case brought by the Baulkham Hills Shire Council was DISMISSED without costs on 16 February 2005.    

6.     These injustices have continued into the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia where a Sequestration Order was made and STAYED for 21 days to allow me time to pay that wrongfully prosecuted “debt”. I did pay that money to the Baulkham Hills Shire Council on day 13 of that 21 days stay – but, when reporting back to the Federal Magistrates Court on day 18 of that 21 days’ stay, the Federal Magistrate REFUSED to cancel the Sequestration Order. I paid the Baulkham Hills Shire Council $25,420 on 25 May 2009 IN PROTEST because I knew that if I didn’t, then they would surely steal my property worth conservatively at $35,000,000 which is crazy that someone thinks they can take my property of $35,000,000 for a supposed “debt” of $22,000 plus some interest (that finally was settled as $25,420) what was AB INITIO and I paid in protest to save my 45 years of hard work in this country not to lose my property because of the baulkham Shire Council’s FRAUD and their legal representatives, Watson & Watson, and others..

7.     I should also state here that Guilia Inga, the Official Receiver, violated that 21 days STAY when on 18 May 2009, she executed a Writ of Commission Appointing Trustees to sequestrate my property. This was the blatant ISSUING OF A FALSE INSTRUMENT BY A PUBLIC OFFICIAL and carries a punishment of imprisonment for 5 years. However, every attempt I have made in the District Court of New South Wales, the Supreme Court of New South Wales, the Federal Court, and Federal Court of Appeal, in particularly Justices Emmett and Foster in the Federal Court not accepting total evidence what I produce in the courts  to seek Justice has been rejected by those courts. By the courts and the judges doing this sort of thing, I am left with no option but to appeal to the High Court but the courts always try to stop me that I have access to the courts which I believe this is unfair and unjustifiable that I don’t have access to my courts. I am not a slave.




Dated: …………………………………..
Signed: ……………………………………………………………..
Name:            Milovan Stankovic,
Address:            P.O. Box 92, Castle Hill, NSW 2154
Tlephone:           0410 242 333      



To:
Commonwealth Attorney General
The Hon Mark Dreyfus MP
Parliament House 
CANBERRA ACT 2600

Attorney General of the A.C.T.
Simon Corbell
The Hon Brendan O'Connor
Parliament House 
CANBERRA ACT 2600

New South Wales Attorney General
(Greg) Gregory Eugene Smith 
Governor Macquarie Tower 
1 Farrer Place, 
SYDNEY NSW 2000
 
Victorian Attorney General
Robert William Clark
1 Treasury Place
MELBOURNE VIC 3002
Queensland Attorney General
Jarrod Pieter Bleijie
GPO Box 149
BRISBANE QLD 4001
 
South Australian Attorney General
The Hon John Rau MP
Level 11, 45 Pirie St
ADELAIDE SA 5000

Western Australian Attorney General
Michael Mischin 
29th Floor, Allendale Square
77 St Georges Terrace
PERTH WA 6000

Tasmanian Attorney General
Brian Neal Wightman 
Level 10, 15 Murray Street
HOBART TAS 7000

Northern Territory Attorney General
Johan (John) Wessel Elferink 
Parliament House
DARWIN NT 0800

ACT Attorney General
Mr Simon Corbell MLA
A.C.T. Legislative Assembly
London Circuit
 
CANBERRA ACT 2601

New Zealand Attorney General
Hon Simon Power
Parliament Buildings
WELLINGTON 6160
NEW ZEALAND
 
Norfolk Island Attorney General
The Hon Craig Anderson, MLA
Old Military Barracks
Quality Row, Kingston
NORFOLK ISLAND
SOUTH PACIFIC

 
 
*******************************************************
 
ITEM #2: LEAFLET on ILLEGALITY of COURT-ENFORCED BANKRUPTCIES
 

ALL COURT-ENFORCED BANKRUPTCIES ARE ILLEGAL


Bankruptcy means being declared insolvent or unable to pay creditors. If an individual or a corporation voluntarily declares bankruptcy, they can contract with an insolvency practitioner and sequestrate their estate over to them for safekeeping to keep possession, take the rents, issues and profits into their own hands. The agent/trustee can only execute transactions with the consent of the self-imposed bankrupt for the duration of the contract.

If an individual or corporation denies they are bankrupt and does not voluntarily declare it, then, for dispossession to occur, claiming creditors must go to Court to seek (1) a Bankruptcy Judgment and (2) a Sequestration Order. But, in Australia, there are NO BANKRUPTCY JUDGMENTS made in any Courts. Instead, bankruptcy is declared as an “Administrative Decision” by a Civil Servant in a statutory body called “ITSA” (the Insolvency and Trustee Services Australia) and a Court is only used to enforce that decision with a Sequestration Order. SEQUESTRATION is a Writ of Commission called a “Certificate of Appointment of Trustee”, to enter upon the real or personal estate of the defendant, and to take the rents, issues and profits into their own hands, and keep possession of, or pay the same as the court shall order and direct, until the party who is in contempt shall do that which he is enjoined to do, and which is specially mentioned in the writ.

The RULE OF LAW in Australia is that, “No Free Man shall be taken indeed imprisoned, or exiled or outlawed, or dispossessed, or destroyed in any way, nor shall we pass over him nor send over him, unless by the lawful judgment of his equals which is the law of the land.” (Magna Carta 1215 - which is an entrenched Constitutional Enactment and Common Law). In Australia, the People have that inalienable right to Trial by Jury. However, Australian Courts are “Kangaroo Courts” because they “act unfairly or dishonestly or disregard legal rights or disregard legal procedures”.

When DUE PROCESS is disregarded, then “the awards, doings and proceedings to the prejudice of your people in any of the premises shall not be drawn hereafter into consequence or example.” (Petition of Right 1627 – which is also an entrenched Constitutional Enactment and Common Law, as is Habeas Corpus 1641 which abolished the Star Chamber).

Sequestration Orders issued without the benefit of Trial by Jury are FALSE INSTRUMENTS for which the punishment is “imprisonment for 5 years” (Crimes Act 1900)…. not forgetting that every instance of the denial of Trial by Jury is similarly punishable by “a term of not more than 5 years” (Imperial Acts Application Act 1969).

A SLAVE has NEITHER the RIGHT of CONSENT, NOR to PROPERTY, and NOR to TRIAL BY JURY. ARE YOU A SLAVE or ARE YOU A FREE MAN?

Written by John Wilson, http://www.rightsandwrong.com.au
 

4 comments:

  1. ANNUANCEMENT
    Inbox
    x

    Rogerio Cristovao
    4:41 AM (15 hours ago)

    to me, Chan, Lisa, JimMacleo, petermarkan
    Dear Friends.
    I am please to announce that my Ex Part Application for leave to issue a Proceeding
    in the High Court, Affidavits in support Form 20 Writ of Summons Amended have been
    received today showing H Court stamp filed dated on 8 July 2013.
    The namely Defendants are (the State of Western Australia as Represented by the Attorney General of WA)
    and by the Commonwealth of Australia as Represented by the attorney General of the Commonwealth)

    I would like to give my great thanks to Mr Nicholas Chin on his assistance.
    The Road of the end starts NOW.
    Since I am a litigant in person without legal counsel or law training I believe I will need assistance
    of tip offs how I should command particulars to the Highest judges of the Court which I never
    believe I need to come to that point.
    Please all if need be assistance from that side that help be needed contact me for anything conditional
    to approval of my mentor Nicholas Chinn.

    God bless yours ALL and we will be in touch

    Thank you Nicholas and Good luck to Chan, Peter and Berto.
    Cheers
    Roger

    ReplyDelete
  2. [JusicialCorruptionAustralia] Knowledge is Power
    Inbox
    x

    chas x
    1:11 pm (1 day ago)

    to Rogerio, bcc: me
    Dear Mr Rogerio , Mr Chin and Berto,

    1. Firstly, where are your DOCUMENTS?
    2. The Tactic they will use is to bury your arguments so that NOONE else can use it !! Why help them?
    3. Either you have a legal argument or you don't? They can bullshit around BUT you cannot.
    4. Its a matter of if HOW many people are going to USE your legal arguments, and NOT how many people you can get your court cases.
    5. Sympathy (Aborigines, females and children; everyone else is totally f'ed) only goes a certain extent, and then they smash all slaves of their system,
    6. So either you post your documents, or you go the way of the Trial by Jury people (their arguments got exposed)
    7. You can post to Google groups, Berto
    https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/aus.politics

    or aus.legal

    8. Posting to email doesnt get wide audience, and google cannot archive their "names" for search engines.

    9. Anyone who has any good speeches, that they would like posted on youtube but is shy, i have COMPUTER VOICES, English US/UK/MALE/FEMALE, who can read your text. Send them to me,

    10. I have tools to compress PDF/images if your files are large and u want to share them.

    Knowledge is POWER !!


    C
    http://kangaroocourtaustralia.tk/
    http://kangaroocourtsofaustralia.tk/

    PS. Mr Rogerio, you do know that an ex parte is their tactics to deny you access right? If the court cannot answer your initial LEGAL ARGUMENTS, why waste your time on an ex parte?

    EX PARTE means the court is running the case FOR the other party, you are DOOMED straight away. I told Mr Chin and he should really know and understand, your hope is probably in Treaties section in the constitution and the judiciary act, and the Mandamus sections. Anything else and they bullshit their way around the facts and statutes.









    On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Rogerio Cristovao <> wrote:
    Dear Friends.
    I am please to announce that my Ex Part Application for leave to issue a Proceeding
    in the High Court, Affidavits in support Form 20 Writ of Summons Amended have been
    received today showing H Court stamp filed dated on 8 July 2013.
    The namely Defendants are (the State of Western Australia as Represented by the Attorney General of WA)
    and by the Commonwealth of Australia as Represented by the attorney General of the Commonwealth)

    I would like to give my great thanks to Mr Nicholas Chin on his assistance.
    The Road of the end starts NOW.
    Since I am a litigant in person without legal counsel or law training I believe I will need assistance
    of tip offs how I should command particulars to the Highest judges of the Court which I never
    believe I need to come to that point.
    Please all if need be assistance from that side that help be needed contact me for anything conditional
    to approval of my mentor Nicholas Chinn.

    God bless yours ALL and we will be in touch

    Thank you Nicholas and Good luck to Chan, Peter and Berto.
    Cheers
    Roger

    Rogerio Cristovao
    6:39 PM (21 hours ago)

    to me
    What should I do?

    ReplyDelete
  3. re: Granting the LEGAL IMMUNITY
    Inbox
    x

    Ruth OGorman RuthOGorman@gmx.li via gmx.co.uk
    4:54 AM (16 hours ago)

    to me
    I sent invoice to Bar Association of Queensland for the service I provided to them
    of 'public ridicule' and 'public humiliation'.
    They did not question, query or protest my Invoice.
    Neither, they questioned or deny the fact of me providing them the service nor its quality!
    Instead, they made a wink in Supreme Court direction and said 'MATES, sweep this matter under
    the carpet' with the hope that one of the judges will use sorcery to rationalize this.
    To have similar standing in Court as they I am demanding the 'IMMUNITY' - the same as barrister have and
    I am eligible for as an 'advocate'. As you should know there is no formal legislation as such giving them the 'immunity'.
    The legal basis for that is only the blessing given to that concept by their mates in judiciary.

    Australia is the last country in the world to retain advocates' immunity, a doctrine inherited from feudal times that
    shields barristers and solicitors from being sued by their clients for how they perform in court. Acknowledged
    as 'unfair', 'unjust', promoting corruption, depravity, unwarranted protection of deceitfulness Canada rejected it in 1861
    and even England - where the doctrine originated - rejected it in 2000. New Zealand rejected it in 2004.


    SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

    REGISTRY : Brisbane


    NUMBER : 6041/13


    Plaintiff:
    Peter Markan

    AND


    Defendant:
    Bar Association of Queensland

    APPLICATION

    TAKE NOTICE that the Plaintiff is applying to the Court for the following order:
    Granting the LEGAL IMMUNITY for anything done or said in Court by the Plaintiff.

    1. Having regard to the concept of 'equality before the law' being one of the main cornerstones of this legal system
    and taking into consideration the fact that in Court proceedings the presiding judge and the barrister representing
    the BAQ have 'immunities - I am demanding to be guaranteed and legally provided the immunity for anything
    said or done in the Court.

    2.Legal Reference - Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 - Schedule 2-International Covenant on
    Civil and Political Rights - Article 14 - 'All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals.

    ReplyDelete
  4. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone
    shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.'

    3. The fact that the other party before this Court has the 'immunity', giving them clear and distinctive advantage,
    puts them in privileged position and that is the abuse of the fair and just trial concept.

    4. Discriminating against me by not providing me with the same privileges and rights
    as the other party in Court is also the abuse of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 sections 7,8,9,10,11.

    5. From the legal perspective the privilege of 'immunity' was debated ( among others) and affirmed by High Court
    in D'Orta-Ekenaike v Victoria Legal Aid [2005] HCA 12.
    'Whether advocate's immunity necessary to ensure finality of judicial process'.

    6. Since by representing myself in Court and being anti-mafia campaigner I am, in the legal sense, the 'advocate'-
    ( Self-Advocacy is not excluded or prohibited by law ) I demand granting me the immunity.

    This application will be heard by the Court at Brisbane on 25.07.2013 at 10 am

    Filed in the Brisbane Registry on : 22.07.2013

    Signed:
    Description: Plaintiff

    This Claim is to be served on: Chief Executive Officer
    Bar Association of Queensland
    Level 5 , Inns of Court
    107 North Quay
    Brisbane , Qld 4000
    .
    Information about my battle with the devilish forces in barbaric Queensland
    ( with the copies of relevant documents ) is on
    - www.petermarkan.org/aa_baq_invoice.html
    - www.queenslandinstitute.org/aa_baq_invoice.html
    and some others .
    ( my opponents are using various tricks to hinder access to those sites,
    Google helps by blocking search results )
    .
    You are receiving this email as the person of public importance and the matters
    this message refer to are not only personal but also public importance as well .
    Respectfully
    Peter Markan
    .
    This message is sent by
    Peter Markan
    64 Wishart Rd
    Up . Mt Gravatt .
    Qld . 4122 , Australia
    petermarkan@queenslandinstitute.org
    .
    If this message was sent in error please
    write word ' remove ' in email to
    petermarkan@queenslandinstitute.org

    ReplyDelete