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

_____________________________________________

AUSTRALIAN SOVEREIGN PARTY APPOINTS NICHOLAS N CHIN AS HONORARY LEGAL ADVISOR

RE: Hello Nicholas.

	Inbox		x

Gregory Orfanidis via LinkedIn	8:43 PM (26 minutes ago)
to me

LinkedIn Gregory Orfanidis has sent you a message. Date: 2/21/2013 Subject: RE: Hello Nicholas. Hello Nicholas, That's fantastic to hear, and thank you for the nice words also. As I said, I don't ever intend for this to infringe on your time, and so with your permission, I will keep your contact details handy to utilise purely in the event the committee requires legal advice (which may be very rarely). Thank you again Nicholas. Keep fighting the good fight. Kindest Regards, Greg Orfanidis National Secretary On 02/18/13 7:14 AM, Nicholas N Chin wrote: -------------------- Thank you Greg for your kindly words. The Almighty Creator shall reward for your just thoughts and your predisposition to want to know the Truth. I am willing to play the role you have entrusted me to and shall be happy to hear further from you. Cheers NICHOLAS N CHIN On 01/02/13 4:52 AM, Gregory Orfanidis wrote: -------------------- Hello Nicholas, It's great to make a connection with you on LinkedIn. As an ASP member, and as a legal professional, I was hoping that you'd consider a proposal that I'm about to make. The ASP has now obtained its requisite to register federally in time for the upcoming election. We’ve attracted some invaluable people that have become active members – a couple of economists, a marketer, a graphics designer, and many others. The one very important role we haven’t yet covered is a legal advisor – which is why I’m writing to you. We all have our full-time jobs and are busy, as I’m sure you are, so I don’t want you to get the wrong impression of what I’m proposing here. The Legal Advisor role is not an office-bearer role, so you won’t need to be actively involved – unless you want to be of course. We essentially need someone with your background and expertise to fulfil this role to simply advise on matters legal if and when we require something confirmed or expertly assessed. Again, this is not designed to infringe on your work at all, and there is never any pressure associated with this role. Let me know your thoughts. I'll respect your decision either way. Looking forward to your response. Kindest Regards, Greg Orfanidis.

MY COMPLAINT WITH AUSTRALIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSIONER AND ITS RESPONSE

REPLY FROM LANI WESTCOTT OF COMMONWEALTH HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSIONER


Posted by Nicholas N Chin on February 20, 2013 at 12:44am in ActivismView Discussions.Complaints Info
9:18 pm (1 day ago)
to me

Dear Mr Chin I refer to your further email. Under the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) (AHRCA), the Commission can investigate alleged breaches of human rights against the Commonwealth of Australia or one of its agents. Human rights are specifically defined to include those rights as provided for in the international instruments scheduled or declared to the AHRCA, including International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). From the information you have provided, it does not appear the outlined situation would be covered by these human rights provisions as it does not involve the Commonwealth or one of its agents. Rather it appears your concerns are with the Western Australian Department of the Premier and Cabinet and the Western Australian Legal Profession Complaints Committee.

Kind regards Lani Westcott

Complaint Information Officer

Australian Human Rights Commission
Level 3, 175 Pitt St, Sydney NSW 2000
GPO Box 5218, Sydney NSW 2001

Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 6:33 AM, Nicholas N Chin a href="mailto:nnchin09@tpg.com.au" target="_blank">nnchin09@tpg.com.au> wrote:

Dear Lani:

I refer to your response email to me as indicated below where you imply that my human rights has been violated by the State of Western Australia in relation to ICPPR.

I should appreciate that you address article 2 of the ICPPR with regard to the duties and obligations of our Commonwealth Human Rights Commisioner to me as an Australian citizens, in terms of the following:

Article 2

1.Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the present Covenant, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

2.Where not already provided for by existing legislative or other measures, each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take the necessary steps. in accordance with its constitutional processes and with the provisions of the present Covenant, to adopt such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to give effect to the rights recognized in the present Covenant.

3.Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes:

1.To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity; to ensure that any person claiming such a remedy shall have his rights thereto determined by competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities, or by any other competent authority provided for by the legal system of the State, and to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy;

2.To ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted.

Cheers

NICHOLAS N CHIN



On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Complaints Info wrote:
Dear Nicholas
I refer to your contact with the Commission regarding the State of Western Australia and the Legal Profession Complaints Committee.
The Australian Human Rights Commission has the power to investigate and conciliate complaints about:
discrimination because of a person’s race, sex, pregnancy, marital status, age or disability as well as sexual harassment in specific areas of public life, such as, employment, education, providing you with goods and services and accommodation;
racial hatred that takes place in public;
discrimination in employment because of a person’s criminal record, sexual preference, trade union activity, religion, political opinion or social origin; or
breaches of human rights by the Commonwealth of Australia or one of its agents only.

While I appreciate that this matter is important to you, it does not appear that the Commission’s Investigation and Conciliation Section can assist you with this matter as it does not appear to raise issues that fall within our laws.

If you have further questions, please advise via return email or call the Complaint Information Line on 1300 656 419.
Kind regards
Bethany Hender
Complaint Information Officer
Australian Human Rights Commission
Level 3, 175 Pitt St, Sydney NSW 2000
GPO Box 5218, Sydney NSW 2001
T 1300 656 419 F +61 2 9284 9611
E complaintsinfo@humanrights.gov.au W www.humanrights.gov.au

From: Nicholas N Chin nnchin1@gmail.com

Date: Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: Contact with the Australian Human Rights Commisson [DLM=Sensitive:Personal]
To: Complaints Info complaints.info@humanrights.gov.au
Dear Ms Hender
I would appreciate if you would be kind enough to state specifically your statement of reason in relation to the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Cheers.
Nicholas N Chin
Sent from my iPad

UNITY PARTY INQUIRY FROM THE CHIEF JUSTICE REGARDING THE APPEALS OF NICHOLAS N CHIN

Re: Mr. Nicholas N. Chin

Inbox

x

Unity Party WA	Feb 10 (3 days ago)
to Chief.Justice.., Attorney, Peter, me

The Hon. Chief Justice Wayne Stewart Martin AC

Executive Assistant, Chief Justice's Chambers - tel  
E-mail - Chief.Justice.Chambers@justice.wa.gov.au
Associate - tel  (08) 9421 5479
E-mail - Associate.Chief.Justice@justice.wa.gov.au

The Human Right Commissioner

Australian Human Rights Commission

Address   .C.Chun

The Notice of Consolidated Appeal and the Notice of Appeal against the Full Bench Decision dated 27.6.2012 and 3.1.2013 respectively have not been returned to Mr. Chin yet despite repeated reminders of Mr. Chin through Ms. Tracey, who is the Associate to the Court of Appeal Registrar.

 

I would like to remind you that Australia is a signatory to the United Nations International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights since 1972 and did confirm its commitment to it in 1980 (the ICCPR).   Article 2 of the ICCPR provides that Australia through its state agents must provide competent judiciary and administrative services to ensure that proper remedies at law are being provided to its citizens to redress any form of injustice that is being meted out to our member Mr. Nicholas N Chin.

 

As the Chief Justice of Western Australia would you ensure that Justice to Mr. Chin is done through competent judiciary and administrative officers of the West Australian Government as he complained that he was unfairly treated after a license was granted to him.

We look forward to hear from you in due course.

Yours respectfully,

President

Unity Party WA

info@unitywa.org

http://unitypartywa.wordpress.com

http://unitywaorg.blogspot.com.au

http://twitter.com/unitypartywa

Phone/Fax: 61893681884

Environmental friendly - save the trees - use email.

UPWA is the only political party that calls a spade a spade.

Chief.Justice.Chambers@justice.wa.gov.au	Dear Sir Thank you for your email. For reasons that I am sure you will apprec...	Feb 11 (2 days ago)

Unity Party WA	4:29 pm (1 day ago)
to Christina.Curt., Attorney, me, Peter

Dear Chief Justice,

Thank you for your kindly reply.  We shall wait the court's decision in the not too distant future with regard to the litigation of Nicholas N Chin in the light of the following reasonable implications deriving from the reply of His Honour the Chief Justice: 

a) The non-registration of the Notice of Consolidated Appeal of Mr. Chin dated 27.6.2012 is awaiting consideration by the Court of Appeal Registrar. 

b) The non-registration of the Notice of Appeal of Mr. Chin dated 3.1.2013 against the Full Bench Decision to remove Mr. Chin unlawfully from the roll of barristers and solicitors is also awaiting consideration by the Court of Appeal Registrar. 

c) There is an assurance that the public interests of fair and equal justice will be provided by the judicial system of WA to every litigant in the State of WA in accordance with Article 2 of the United Nations International Covenant and Civil Rights (the ICCPR). 

In view of the above, Mr. Chin had notified the Court of Appeal Registrar that he shall be away from the jurisdiction for some two to three months as from mid-March of 2013 and shall accordingly be given the opportunity to be heard on his two appeals upon his return.

Yours respectfully, 

Eddie Hwang

-----Original Message-----
From: Christina.Curtis@justice.wa.gov.au
[mailto:Christina.Curtis@justice.wa.gov.au] On Behalf Of
Chief.Justice.Chambers@justice.wa.gov.au
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 3:03 PM
To: info@unitywa.org
Cc: Peter Torrens; Attorney General - WA ; Nicholas N Chin
Subject: Re: Mr. Nicholas N. Chin

Dear Sir

Thank you for your email.

For reasons that I am sure you will appreciate, it is not my practice to engage in correspondence dealing with particular cases which are before the court with persons who are not parties to those proceedings.

However, I would observe that I have no reason to think that there has been any failure to provide a completely adequate system of justice in order to deal with the litigation involving Mr Nicholas Chin.

Yours sincerely

The Hon Wayne Martin AC
Chief Justice of Western Australia

             Unity Party WA
             <info@unitywa.org>  

To: <Chief.Justice.Chambers@justice.wa.gov.au>

11/02/2013 03:42PM 

cc:"Attorney General - WA " <minister.mischin@dpc.wa.gov.au>,
Peter Torrens<jptorrens@iprimus.com.au>, 

Nicholas N Chin <nnchin1@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Mr. Nicholas N. Chin

The Hon. Chief Justice Wayne Stewart Martin AC

Executive Assistant, Chief Justice's Chambers - tel E-mail -
Chief.Justice.Chambers@justice.wa.gov.au

Associate - tel  (Embedded image moved to file: pic30523.gif)(08) 9421 5479

E-mail - Associate.Chief.Justice@justice.wa.gov.au

The Human Right Commissioner
Australian Human Rights Commission

Address   .C.Chun
The Notice of Consolidated Appeal and the Notice of Appeal against the Full Bench Decision dated 27.6.2012 and 3.1.2013 respectively have not been returned to Mr. Chin yet despite repeated reminders of Mr. Chin through Ms. Tracey, who is the Associate to the Court of Appeal Registrar.

I would like to remind you that Australia is a signatory to the United Nations International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights since 1972 and did confirm its commitment to it in 1980 (the ICCPR).   Article 2 of the ICCPR provides that Australia through its state agents must provide competent judiciary and administrative services to ensure that proper remedies at law are being provided to its citizens to redress any form of injustice that is being meted out to our member Mr. Nicholas N Chin.

As the Chief Justice of Western Australia would you ensure that Justice to Mr. Chin is done through competent judiciary and administrative officers of the West Australian Government as he complained that he was unfairly treated after a license was granted to him.

We look forward to hear from you in due course.

Yours respectfully,

Eddie Hwang

President
Unity Party WA
info@unitywa.org
http://unitypartywa.wordpress.com
http://unitywaorg.blogspot.com.au
http://twitter.com/unitypartywa
Phone/Fax: 61893681884

Date: 11-2-2013.

Environmental friendly - save the trees - use email.UPWA is the only political party that calls a spade a spade.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this e-mail may be private and personal or otherwise confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of any part of the information is unauthorised. If you have received this e-mail in error, please inform thesender and delete the document.

PROCEDURAL ERRORS MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO PREJUDICE MY FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS TO WORK IN MY CHOSEN PROFESSION

McKechnie J in LEGAL PROFESSION COMPLAINTS COMMITTEE -v- CHIN [2012] WASC 467 or LPD 2 OF 2012 refers to the procedural errors committed by the Respondent in the following paragraphs of his judgment:

6. Re Nicholas Ni Kok Chin; Ex parte Chin [2012] WASC 219 was an

attempt by the practitioner to re-litigate matters which had been

determined by the Court of Appeal. He did not seek leave to commence

the proceedings as required by the order of Murray J. The application was

dismissed. This is a procedural decision.
ANSWER: LEAVE WAS SOUGHT. NOTICE OF APPEAL DATED 27.6.2012 WAS LODGED AND IS WITHOUT A CACV NUMBER. 

7 Re Nicholas Chin; Ex parte Chin [2012] WASC 220 was an

application for judicial review in respect of Murray J's order. The

applicant did not lodge a notice of appeal in the Court of Appeal. This is

the only competent way to challenge the order. The application was

dismissed. Again the decision was procedural.
ANSWER: NOTICE OF APPEAL DATED 27.6.2012 WAS LODGED AND IS WITHOUT A CACV NUMBER.    

IN RELATION TO S.244 OF THE LPA2008:

34 The practitioner's written and oral submissions before us revealed a

profound failure to understand the character of these proceedings and the

legal framework for its determination. He invited us to reject, ignore or

invalidate the findings of SAT. He submits, for example, that the court

should not accede to the recommendations of SAT because 'it is a void

recommendation' and 'it is based on falsity ... falsehood ... [and] improper

motives' (ts 8). No such course is open to us in this proceeding. It is not

an appeal from, or application for judicial review of, the SAT's decision.

To the contrary, SAT's report is conclusive as to the facts and findings in

it.

ANSWER: NOTICE OF APPEAL DATED 3.1.2012 WAS LODGED AND IS WITHOUT A CACV NUMBER.

In the terms of the above procedural errors committed by the Respondent and NOTICE OF APPEAL HAVING BEEN LODGED DATED 27.6.2012, the Full Bench has a duty to ensure that the Appellant did not suffer prejudice in accordance with the accepted principle of law that procedural errors as opposed to errors in substantive law should not prejudice the Respondent's fundamental rights to earn a living.  In this respect, the Respondent appends below the judgments of the Court of Appeal in Glew v Frank Jasper Pty Ltd [2010] WASCA 87 at para.10 where their Honours Murphy J and Newnes JA made the following observations:  

“A Court should always be careful to see that the rights of an unrepresented litigant have not been “obfuscated by their own advocacy”: Neil v Nottr [1994) HCA l23(5).  It must be alert to the possibility that beneath inadequately expressed and often irrelevant material there may lurk an arguable case. And some leniency may be required in relation to compliance with the rules.  But in the end the allowances that can be made for a litigant in person are necessarily limited, both as a matter of fairness to the other party, who must be adequately informed of the case they have meet, and because the provision of acceptable grounds of appeal is fundamental to the appellate function by the court.”