MY ADMISSIONS AS AN ADVOCATE AND SOLICITOR TO THE MALAYSIAN BAR UNDER PETITION NO. 18-655 OF 2005

Nicholas N Chin	12:35 PM (6 hours ago)
to Lilian, bpyap, kaveetha

The President of the Malaysian Bar Council

Malaysian Bar

Attention: Ms. Lilian Cheong

Mr. Yap Bell Pung

Bell & Lee 

Advocates and Solicitors of Malacca.

Atten: Mr. Yap Bell Pung.

Ms. Kaveetha a/p Arumugam

Registrar

Appeals and Special Powers

High Court Kuala Lumpur

Komplek Pejabat-Pejabat Kerajaan

Jalan Duta

Kuala Lumpur

Atten: Ms. Kaveetha a/p Arumugam

Dear Sirs

I refer to my telephone conversation with your Ms. Lilian Cheong of the Malaysian Bar today.   I would like to state the following: 

1) The Malaysian Bar Council made its wrong decision in the abovenamed Petition to exempt me for three months of Reading in Chamber Period for a pupil lawyer under my Master mentor Mr. Yap Bell Pung, instead of my rightful entitlement of six months for the same, in accordance with the Malaysian laws pertaining to admissions of advocates an solicitors for a Malaysian who had obtained the necessary qualifications and experience as a Barrister and Solicitor of the Western Australian jurisdiction (the Wrong Decision of the Malaysian Bar). 

2) The Wrong Decision of the Malaysian Bar has no reasonable basis as is proven by its subsequent decision to grant exemptions of three months for Reading in Chamber period for persons with similar overseas qualifications, namely: 

2.1. Qualifying Bachelor of Laws Degree acceptable to the Malaysian Bar:  I have in addition my National University of Malaysia Bachelor of Economics with majors in Economics and Accountancy (1977), a Malaysian Teacher's Diploma (1965); Curtin University of Western Australian Post Graduate Diploma in Business Laws with above 70% average grade (1996) entitling me to enter the Murdoch University School of Law in 1997;

2.2. Completed my Article Training period of one year organized by the Legal Practice Board of Western Australia and having passed all related professional Bar Examinations, leading to my admission as a Barrister and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. 

2.3. Mandatory post-admission period of supervised legal practice of one year under the guidance of Mr. Wally Ozich, a practising barrister and solicitor of the Supreme Court of Western Australia of more than 25 year experience as my mentor: a qualification for independent legal practice or legal practice on my own account (Qualifications for Independent Legal Practice). 

2.4. my 18 month period of independent legal practice experience acquired by me after I had obtained my Qualifications for Independent Legal Practice. 

3) The Wrong Decision of the Malaysian Bar had caused me to make a Second Petition in 20011 which was stopped by the then learned Registrar Cik Radziah of the Appeals and Special Powers Divisions of the Kuala Lumpur High Court at Jalan Duta in 2011.  The rationale of Cik Radziah is that I could invoke the abovenamed Petition of 2005 to further file Forms 3 to 8 so that I could be called to the Bar on the ground that I had completed my required three-month Reading in Chamber period in 2005-2006 (the RKK Decision). 

4) I traveled to Kuala Lumpur to have my appointment to see the learned Ms. Kaveetha a/p Arumugam,who is the new Registrar of the RKK replacing Cik Radziah on the 28.3.2013 at 2.00 pm.  Ms. Kaveetha confirms the RKK Decision. 

5) As a result of the above, I have rung my Master-Mentor Mr. Yap Bell Pung and shall engage with him again at about 2.00 pm today to further discuss the contents of this email to you. 

6) The reason for my delay in making this Final Application for Admission as an Advocate and Solicitor to the Malaysian Bar is that by September, 2006, I was embroiled in a dispute with the regulator of the legal profession in the State of Western Australia which made its initial decision not to disbar me from legal practice but on the unreasonable grounds that I be placed under supervisory practice again but had finally disbarred me on 12.12.2013 for which I had appealed.  The reasons for my appeal are in terms of the following: 

6.1. I had made false allegations against fellow legal practitioners Solicitors Timothy Robin Thies, David Taylor and Pino Monaco (the Impugned False Allegations);

6.2. I sought to correct the injustice done to me on the ground that the Impugned False Allegations were based on Untruths (the Untruths).

6.3. Once the Untruths were proved to the satisfaction of the various tribunals, the regulator through its disciplinary statutory body, the LPCC changed the goal posts and made me guilty of a sham dishonesty of a victim-less contrived fraud regarding the matter of my former client Mrs. Mathias.  She was an unwilling complainant and there was no deprivation of properties or monies of her by me.  The matter was already decided and any res judicata decision based on false grounds is null and void (the Sham Dishonesty). 

6.4 The Supreme Court decision to remove me from the roll of barristers and solicitors dated 12.12.2012 is null and void because it did not take into account my written submission regarding the Sham Dishonesty and upon technical grounds. You have my assurance that I am mature enough and am not in the habit of stirring up the hornet's nests by inviting controversy nor mishandling the good relationship and goodwill that ought to be subsisting between fellows members of the legal profession both in Malaysia and overseas. 

6.5. All matters affecting my legal entitlement to practice law in Western Australia post September, 2006 hinges on the controversy of the initial non-suspension of my practice certificate despite its being unlawfully withheld upon invalid grounds by an unauthorized groups of persons that I work under supervision, which I was objecting to, at all material times (the Controversy).

6.6. The purpose of my seeking Malaysian Bar Admission as an Advocate and solicitor is to enable me to help Malaysians residing in Australia or people who have interests in dealing with Malaysia by providing them with legal advice and help and other assistance as a foreign lawyer in Western Australia irrespective of whether I seek to register with the Australian Government or not and depending on the legal requirements of my legal practice, pending the resolution of my Controversy with the WA regulator. 

6.6. The matters of the Controversy is currently under appeal and is being controverted to by my many Australian Supporters against the WA regulator, as is being exemplified by the Comments in the Just Grounds Community website at Nicholas N Chin's Page at http://justgroundsonline.com/profile/NicholasNChin and Nicholas N Chin's Discussions at: http://justgroundsonline.com/forum/topic/listForContributor?user=2kb4af2y65b7j.  This is despite the fact that I am currently helping many Australians legally and on a pro bono basis to solve their dispute with the legal profession apparently seen to be plundering and pillaging their clients, with the apparent connivance of the regulator. Amongst them are many learned and distinguished people who are at loggersheads with the Australian government's implementation of the judiciary system in Australia.  This is true democracy at work. 

6.7. In the public interests, I would appreciate if the Malaysian Bar would look into the intricacies of my dispute with the regulator of the legal profession of WA as is available at my blogspots, the links of which are as follows: 

TO READ MORE ABOUT ME AND MY STORY, GOOGLE "NICHOLASNCHIN" FOR MY BLOGSPOT.

Business Web site (Optional)

http://nicholasnchin.blogspot.com

Your Blog (Optional)

http://nnchin1.blogspot.com/

Fackbook Page (Optional)

http://www.facebook.com/people/Nicholas-N-Chin/1040270391

Twitter Account (Optional)

http://wwwnicholasnchin.blogspot.com.au/

Yours faithfully

NICHOLAS N CHIN

2516, Simpang Ampat, 

Brisu Road, Alor Gajah. 78000

Malacca. 

Ph: 06 5529459 Mobile: 01121231220. 

Emails: nnchin1@gmail.com; nnchin1@hotmail.com. 

YOU FIND THE LAW IN CHAS X -CHAS IS GOOD?

Rule of Law: Equality before the Law, and fair hearing

	Inbox		x

chas x	3:52 PM (1 hour ago)
to L-F, Nicholas, Dick, bcc: me

Dear

Dick Yardley,

Leong-Fook Ng,

Dick Yardley,

Friends and Foes alike,

1. There were attachments from Dick Yardley <dick.yardley@gmail.com>, email him if you want them. 

2. I am NOT a lawyer-wannabe, I do NOT wish to give people false hopes, I certainly DO NOT wish to weasel money out of people (Although donations are always welcome ;) ) So if you see ANYONE soliciting money in my name: YOU KNOW THAT'S NOT ME !!

3. I really dont want to butt my head against the whiteman's constitution; Maybe there is a corporation called Commonwealth of Australia, but I don't see how that should affect my Equality before the Law and fair hearing, regardless of whether my name is spelt with capital letters or not.

4. What I see is a bunch of corrupt, dishonorable judges doing dishonorable things to protect their mates abusing the system; REGARDLESS OF THIS CORPORATION. That is the Nature of the Beast, the Heart of Darkness.

5. REGARDLESS OF THIS CORPORATION. Feel free to prove me wrong.

6. You can prosecute judges if you can prove that "they acted in bad faith".  QED

7. Mr Leong-Fook Ng, you have a doctor's degree, I certainly would like to know what happended at VCAT in your cases or cases that you know of. If you have a title use it as leverage.

8. Mr Nicholas N Chin, Please Note"territory"

CRIMES ACT 1914 - SECT 3

"Commonwealth officer" means a person holding office under, or employed by, the Commonwealth, and includes:

                     (a)  a person appointed or engaged under the Public Service Act 1999 ;

                    (aa)  a person permanently or temporarily employed in the Public Service of a Territory or in, or in connection with, the Defence Force, or in the Service of a public authority under the Commonwealth;

                 http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca191482/s3.html

9. What do Leong-Fook Ng and Nicholas N Chin, have? titles, there is also David a former policemen.

We will see how much weight I have as a former Naval Officer LOL.

10. You have to use your titles as leverage, because the Emperors without Clothes 

with abuse the titles and position.

11. Mr Chin as a lawyer, need to look at 

http://www.communitylaw.org.au/flemingtonkensington/cb_pages/uncommunication.php

and talk with Counsel Emrys Nekvapil

I have plenty of evidence of judicial corruption.

12. Its easier to try a bunch of corrupt judges in the court of public opinion, 

than it is to expose that Commonwealth of Australia Corporation.

13. Feel free to cut down my arguments, DO NOT ATTACK THE PERSON !!

14. BECAUSE I DONT THINK THE HIGH COURT AUSTRALIA KNOWS HOW TO

ANSWER MY QUESTION OF LAWS:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/123922586/Unsafe-High-Court-Australia-accused-of-undermining-the-Australian-Constitution-Thorpe-pham-Zhang-Ngo-vs-Commonwealth-Because-Freedom-and-Habeas

15. That is my technical knock out.....Just have to enforce the Rule of Law.

16. Remember: The process does NOT work, if it's NOT being applied.

Gluck applying the Law,

C

JOHN WILSON: COURTS CONCEALING FRAUD

Courts CONCEALING FRAUD

Inbox

x

John Wilson	12:04 PM (1 hour ago)
to David

Greg Smith,

Attorney-general of New South Wales,

Level 31,

Governor Macquarie Tower,

1 Farrer Place,

Sydney,

NSW 2000.

Email: office@smith.minister.nsw.gov.au

Dear Mr Smith,

Re:  the DISTRICT COURT of NSW at Parramatta CONCEALING FRAUD.

In the case of Milovan Stankovic appealing against a "conviction" in the Local Court, case No: 2012/00299421-001.

Milovan Stankovic's life has been ruined by a FALSE INSTRUMENT issued by a PUBLIC OFFICIAL named Guilia Inga, the OFFICIAL RECEIVER,  when she executed a Writ of Commission for the Sequestration of his estate on 18 May 2009 - which was 15 days BEFORE the EXPIRATION of a 21 day STAY.

Milovan actually PAID the full amount (plus additional interest) to the one and only "Creditor" (the Baulkham Hills Shire Council) on 25 May 2009, which was on day #13 of the 21 day STAY, thereby wiping out what was really an ILLEGITIMATE claim because the supposed "Costs" were illegitimate (having been created AFTER a case in the Land & Environment Court has been DISMISSED on 16 February 2005).  

There was NO BANKRUPTCY JUDGMENT, whatsoever, and many lawyers CONSPIRED TO DEFRAUD Milovan of his 5-acre property in suburban Kellyville as they took advantage of Guilia Inga's FALSE INSTRUMENT, aided and abetted by State and Federal "Judges" and "Magistrates". 

Milovan is now trying to prosecute the Hills Shire Council and many lawyers in a Federal Court action, NSD 1571 of 2012.

The reason for this email to you is to ask you to sort out the criminality of the Registrar and a Judge at the District Court at Parramatta who will NOT ALLOW Milovan to have either an audio disc of proceedings nor, what is incredibly to any ordinary people, a copy of a letter Guilia Inga sent to the District Court when she failed to comply with a SUBPOENA to give evidence on 22 February 2013.

The staff in the Registry of the District Court at Parramatta are nasty and belligerent in their REFUSING Milovan a copy of that Guila Inga letter.

The OFFENCE of a PUBLIC OFFICIAL issuing a FALSE INSTRUMENT is punishable by 5 years imprisonment.

This situation of issuing FALSE INSTRUMENTS is now commonplace and extends to issuing ORDERS from Court actions where the RIGHT to TRIAL BY JURY has been DENIED ... and that is NOTHING LESS than TREASON, ie: to overthrow the Sovereignty of the People.

The FRAUD and WICKEDNESS in the Courts of Australia MUST be PUT TO AN END.

This DENIAL of a letter IN THE FILE of Milovan Stankovic is the TIP OF THE ICEBERG .... but it is easily remedied by a simple DIRECTIVE from you to allow Milovan to have a copy of that letter to pass on to his lawyers.

Also, you can tell the personnel at that District Court to release that audio disc, as well.

But, NUMBER 1 is that letter.

Yours sincerely,

John Wilson

for Milovan Stankovic, whose mobile number is 0410 242 333.

PS:

Thank you for your email to the Office of the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, the Hon. Greg Smith SC MP. Please accept this as acknowledgement of receipt of your electronic mail.

Your email is important to us, please be patient while we address your concerns as this office receives a high volume of matters. You will receive a response in due course, if appropriate.

Please note that if your email is not addressed specifically to this office, no action will be taken. However, if you wish to receive a response, please resend the email to this office directly and please include an appropriate postal address for a response.

If you are an Epping constituent or your matter concerns something which falls within the Member for Epping’s electorate, your email will be forwarded to the Epping office for response. Alternatively, you can email them directly onepping@parliament.nsw.gov.au

_____________________________________________