LETTER TO ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WA RE: VOID COSTS ORDER OF MAGISTRATE SHARRATT IN VRO 585 OF 2018

MC/CIV/MID/RO/585/2018 Chin v Jack Nicholas N Chin 9 August 2018 at 22:51 To: RE_EnquiriesWA Honourable John Quigley MLA Attorney General Address: 5th Floor, Dumas House 2 Havelock Street WEST PERTH WA 6005 Telephone: (08) 6552-6800 Fax: (08) 6552-6801 e-Mail: Minister.Quigley@dpc.wa.gov.au c.c. to Magistrates Court at Midland. cc. to Vogt Graham Lawyers atten Mr. Will Vogt cc: Legal Practice Complaints Committee cc: info@ccc.wa.gov.au Dear Attorney General Mr. Quigley VRO: 585 OF 2018: CHIN V JACK AT MIDLAND MAGISTRATE COURT - MAGISTRATE SHARRATT COSTS ORDER OF $750.00 ON 10.7.2018 AND REGISTRAR WARREN SOUTHWELL COSTS ORDER OF$500.00 DATED 9.8.2018 I refer to the above matter and would like you to solve the impasse for me in terms of the following: 1) On 3.11.2017 my Builder Ian Jack assaulted me and I reported the assault to the Police WA on 6.11.2018 which resulted in a VRO against Ian Jack. 2) On 28.12.2017 Magistrate Sharratt imposed the VRO 1005/2017 against Ian Jack in my favour, which was made final with a 2 year duration (but as a result of my trying to reinstate that VRO 1005/2017 with VRO 585/2018 as the fear of Ian Jack attacking me again is real as he is bound by his contractual obligations under the HIA Lump Contract to complete his job at our home as the SAT Mediation Agreement dated 8.1.2018 and the current Perth Magistrates Court Proceedings in CIV: 4423 of 2018), I landed myself into this trouble. 3) On 29.5.2018, Magistrate Sharratt removed the 2 year VRO 1005/2017 in stealth without conforming to the provisions of the Restraining Orders Act, 1997 WA. 3) On 10.7.2018, Magistrate Sharratt imposed a void costs order on me for alleged contempt of Court for reinstating VRO 1005/2017 with VRO 585/2018 (which I accomplished under the guidance of an officer of the Midland Court), stating that the latter was without leave of court based on the reason that there was a case of the Principal Registrar v Chin in WA Supreme Court in 2012 against me that I was made a vexatious litigant: but I do not require such leave unless the Magistrate Sharratt do find that the VRO 585/2018 is an abuse of process as per para. 149 and 151 of Justice Murray Judgment to the effect that that proceeding against me is not a blanket order to cover all other cases where I have legitimate claims or cause of actions against any other defendants. 4) Today, 9.8.2018 Mr. Warren Southwell as the Registrar of the Midland Magistrate Court again imposed a cost order on me for refusing my stay of execution application of the Sharratt Void Costs Order stating that I do need to seek court leave for the VRO 585 of 2018 under the Vexatious Proceedings Restrictions Act, 1997 contrary to common law and legislation in force in this State. Mr. Gmail - MC/CIV/MID/RO/585/2018 Chin v Jack Page 1 of 2 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1?ik=a95a4253c9&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid… 23/08/2018 Southwell refused to accept the fact that the Sharratt Void Costs Order is the special circumstances under the law warranting the stay of the Sharratt Void Costs Order. In fact, I do not have to do anything to it and do not have to comply with it with no legal consequences but Vogt Graham Lawyers is harassing me to no ends for my compliance with the common law of Australia. I cannot take the stress of litigation and would like to avoid it and therefore hope that you would exercise your kindly discretion to stave off all these problems of attacking an elderly person by the harshness of a legal system which does not respond to conscionability or equitable principles. This is reason for my appealing to you instead of going through the court which will be a heartache for me which I cannot bear anymore at this advanced age. 5) I do not need to appeal the Void Costs Order of Magistrate Sharratt and Registrar Warren Southwell as they are bound by the common law of Australia as promulgated by the High Court of Australia as per Kabel v DPP which is followed by the Court of Appeal in Ho v Loneragan: the void costs order of an inferior court with the missing jurisdictional facts are void and not merely voidable and there is no requirement for me to appeal against them. This is one of the principles of the unified common law of Australia pronounced by the apex court of Australia and is unlike the non-unified common law system of the United States of America. . Please find attached my three submissions documents before Magistrate Sharratt and Registrar Southwell. Please tell me what I should do as I am a disabled pensioner and have no means to pay these intimidating void costs orders and I would not like to be subject to elderly abuse by the legal system of Western Australia. Cheers NICHOLAS NI KOK CHIN mobile contact: 0421642735. Show quoted text The Crime Corruption Commission of WA