Complaint Form
(Version 2/09)
Part A – About you (the complainant) Enquiry
reference no:
Name: Mr NICHOLAS NI KOK
CHIN
Address: 387, ALEXANDER DRIVE, DIANELLA WA Post code: 6059
Contact
numbers: Home:08 92757440 Business: 0892757440
Fax: 0892757440
|
Only fill
out this box if you are complaining on behalf of someone else
|
|
Name of that
person: N/A
What
is your relationship to that person?
N/A
|
|
Only fill
out this box if someone is assisting you with the complaint –
for example a solicitor or union representative
|
|
Name of
representative: N/A
Organisation: N/A..
Postal address: N/A
Contact numbers: Home: N/A Business: N/A Fax:
N/A
Mobile: N/A TTY: N/A Email: N/A
|
**If you need help to fill in
this form please contact one of our Complaint
Information Officers on 1300 656 419
(local call charge) or (02) 9284 9600.
Part B – Your complaint
Who are you complaining about? (the respondent)
1. Name/organisation:. The State Government of Western Australia as represented
by its Chief Executive Officer, the State Premier of Western Australia the
Honourable Colin Barnett MLA
Address:. Department of the Premier and Cabinet, 2 Havelock Street,
WEST PERTH, Post
code:. WA 6005
Contact numbers: Home: 6552 5000
What
is this person’s/organisation’s relationship to you? The person responsible for
establishing 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 for my
rights in accordance with the United Nations International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights of which Australia
is a signatory.
2. Name/organisation: The Legal Profession Complaints Committee of
WA
Address:.Level 2, Colonial Building, 55 St George's Terrace, Perth. Post code: 6000
Contact numbers:
Home:...........................
Business: 08 9461 2299 Fax:..............................
Mobile:.............................. TTY:............................... Email: lpcc@lpbwa.com
What
is this person’s/organisation’s relationship to you? The Statutory Body
responsible for disciplining lawyers namely Mr. Pino Monaco, Mr. David Taylor and Mr. Timothy Robin Thies in
accordance with the Legal Practice Act, 2003 who have been guilty of
professional misconduct and not for abusing its powers to discipline me instead
as a barrister and solicitor for no conceivable wrong-doings or misconduct or
unsatisfactory conduct and thereby depriving me of my status as an independent
lawyer in VR87 of 2009.
If you are complaining about more
than two people or organisations,
please provide this additional information on an extra page.
Why are you complaining to the Commission?
I
am complaining because I believe:
I have been discriminated against because of my sex
(incl pregnancy, marital
status, family responsibilities);
I have been sexually
harassed;
I have been discriminated against because of my race;
(incl descent, national
/ ethnic origin, colour, immigrant status, racial hatred);
I have been discriminated against because I have a disability
(incl physical,
intellectual, psychiatric, learning, work related, medical condition, disease
such as cancer or HIV, associates and carers of a person with a disability);
I have been discriminated against because of my age;
My human rights have been breached by a federal
government agency; or
I have been discriminated against in my employment
because of my (please tick which one):
sexual preference
trade union activity
criminal record
religious belief
political opinion
X I have been treated unfairly for another reason.
1) The Professional
Affairs Committee of the Regulator was infiltrated by Mr. Pino Monaco through a lawyer
Ms. F.B.Walter and therefore usurped the function of its full board which acted
without the majority consent of the 48 members of Legal Practice Board of WA as
provided for by s.11 of the LPAct 2003 (the Usurpation).
2) The Usurpation
caused the LPCC to prosecute me for a perceived deficiency of my professional
knowledge by its inchoate attempt to deprive me of my independence as a lawyer
on the alleged grounds that I have made false allegations against Mr. Pino Monaco, Mr. David Taylor
and Mr. Timothy Robin Thies (the Inchoate Attempt).
3) The Inchoate
Attempt by confirmed by Judge Eckert in VR 137 of 2006 (the Eckert
Confirmation).
4) The Inchoate
Attempt was nipped in the bud by the former President of the Court of Appeal of
the Supreme Court, the then Justice Steytler who issued the Consent Order to
stop the Usurpation (the Steytler Consent Order).
5) A conspiratorial
group from the PAC and other members of the Board again acted without the valid
authority of its majority of 48 members in contravention of s.11 of the LPA2003
Act ignored the Steytler Consent Order and again confirmed the Eckert
Confirmation on 3.4.2008 and 2.5.2008 (the Continued Usurpation).
6) The Continued
Usurpation was confirmed by the President of SAT Justice Chaney in VR 107 of
2008 (President Chaney Confirmation).
7) Justice Heenan of
the Supreme Court was supposed to order the LPCC to show cause with regard to
the wherewithal of Justice Chaney Confirmation but for the intervention of Ms.
Braesich of the Legal Practice Board of WA which caused His Honour to make a
turn-about decision and therefore dismissing my application for Judicial Review
(Dismissal of Judicial Review).
8) The Deputy
President of SAT replaced the President who was disqualified on the ground of
bias to decide the case of the malicious prosecution of the LPCC against me in
VR87 of 2009. This malicious prosecution is aided by the replacement of
LP2003 Act with the LP2008 Act: the latter is to empower the Deputy President
to remove me from the roll of barristers and solicitors for no conceivable
reason which Deputy President had no power to do so under the LP2003 Act. The
anomaly is that I was prosecuted under the provisions of the LP2008 for alleged
wrongs occurred in 2005 to 2006 (the Anomaly).
9) The Anomaly is
exacerbated by s.444 of the LP2008 Act which prevents to Full Bench from
interfering with the voidable, void and erroneous findings of fact of Deputy
President SAT in VR 87 of 2009 dated 24.4.2012 and 20.8.2012. This renders the
decision of the Full Bench of the Supreme Court of WA in LPD2 of 2012 dated
12.12.2012 NULL and VOID on the ground that I was denied my natural justice
(the FB Void Decision).
10) I have lodged my NOTICES OF APPEAL dated 27.6.2012 and
3.1.2013 with the Court of Appeal Registrar, which is pending the decision of
Registrar Eldred. I shall be away from the jurisdiction from mid-March,
2013 for some two or three months (Wait for Registrar Eldred).
11) If the State of WA as the
legitimate signatory of the ICPPR has competent legislative, administrative and
judicial authorities, it must provide me with the necessary remedy because my
rights as a citizen of Australia has been violated by parties who had used the
state machinery to achieve their own private purpose.
When did this
happen? (Day/month/year)
12.th day of December, 2012.
What happened?
Describe
the events that you want to complain about. We need to know what you say
happened, where it happened and who did it. Please give us all
the dates and other details that you can remember. If you are complaining about
employment, please tell us when you commenced employment, your job title and
whether you are still employed.
See the link at Just Grounds Community at Nicholas N Chin Page
and Nicholas N Chin Discussions at:
…I am
fighting my case since 2006 because the West Australian Regulator of the Legal
Profession through a conspiracy with the Legal Profession Complaints Committee
is taking away my lawyer independence with the connivance of the Judiciary of
Western Australia. Gordon Turriff Q.C. the President of the Bar Association of
British Columbia, Canada when he visited Perth in WA in September, 2009, he made
factual findings that the independence of the BAR in Australia especially Western Australia is being suppressed by the Judiciary
and the Regulator. Justice cannot be seen to be done if the Judges are not
Independent. The same goes for the Independence of Lawyers. Why Lawyers are not
independent in WA? They do not want honest lawyers to defend the rights of the
ordinary people so as to facilitate the plundering and the pillaging of the
common people of Western Australia. That is why the ordinary Australians
are losing their homes to predators every year and this is a trend.
More About Me
(Optional)
TO READ MORE ABOUT ME AND MY STORY,
GOOGLE "NICHOLASNCHIN" FOR MY BLOGSPOT.
Business Web site
(Optional)
Your Blog (Optional)
Fackbook Page
(Optional)
Twitter Account
(Optional)
THE PROGRESS FILE AS
ALYN SUGGESTS:
1. 4.1.2005: Letter
of Demand for Dr. K S Chan to the former President of Law Society of WA, Mr. Monaco.
2. 5.1.2005: Mr. Monaco contacted my
principal Mr. Wally Ozcih and I was asked to apologize unconditionally for the
letter of demand and simultaneously complained to the Law Society and the
Regulator.
3. 6.1.2005:
Completed my Restricted Practice Year with Mr. Wally Ozich as my Mentor.
4. 19.1.2005:
Official complaint by Mr. Monaco to the PAC of
Regulator re the Dr. K S Chan Letter of Demand.
5. 4.2.2005: Law
Society wrote to the Regulator and Mr. Ozich re my Website.
6. 7.2.2006: Ms. FB
Walter as one of the 12 elected members of the Regulator attended the LPCC
Meeting as Prosecutor which resolved to investigate further in inter alia the Monaco matters (the
Initiation of Prosecution by the Decision Maker).
5. 24.2.2005: PAC of
Regulator approved my Status for Independent Legal Practice and also decide to
refer the Monaco Complaint to the LPCC.
6. 4.7.2006: Ms. FB
Walter again as Decision Maker attended the Prosecutor's Meeting of LPCC and
resolved to take away my independent status as a lawyer (the Tainted
Decision).
7. 19.7.2006: Ms. FB
Walter again as Decision Maker attended the PAC Meeting of Regulator to
confirmed the Prosecutor's Decison (the Second Tainted Decision).
8. 12.9.2006: Judge
Eckert in VR137 of 2006 decided on my application to confirm the First and
Second Tainted Decision that I am deficient in professional knowledge but not
guilty of professional misconduct/Unsatisfactory Conduct. Barrister Peter
Quinlan said that a decision of the tribunal do not need to be based on Truths
(Judge Eckert Decision).
8. 3.45.2008: The
Special Committee of the Regulator was invalidly appointed without the majority
of the 48 members' consent of the Regulator to provide the Recommendation which
confirms Judge Eckert Decision, such to be proven by valid Minutes made in
accordance with s.11 of the LP2003 Act (the Special Committee Recommendation).
9.2.5.2008: The
Inquiry Committee of three members which did not represent the Full Board (3
were disqualified because they were members of the Special Committee) was set
up by the Regulator to accept the Special Committee's Recommendation. Again it
is invalid (the Invalid Inquiry Committee).
28.10.2008: The SAT
President Chaney J in VR107 of 2008 confirms that the Invalid Inquiry Committee
Decision as correct.
29.3.2009: The LPCC
started prosecuting me in VR 87 of 2009 on the same factual circumstances by
changing them into Professional Misconduct or Unsatisfactory Conduct instead of
DEFICIENCY IN MY PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE. THE SUBSEQUENT COURT HEARINGS BEFORE
THE SUPREME COURTS AND THE COURT OF APPEAL DENIED ME NATURAL JUSTICE AND
REFUSED TO HEAR THE POINTS AS DESCRIBED ABOVE. THIS INCLUDE JUSTICE HEENAN
MAKING A TURNABOUT DECISION IN CIV1019 OF 2010 REQUIRING THE LPCC TO SHOW CAUSE
WHY IT WAS PERSECUTING ME. AS A RESULT OF THE CLANDESTINE CONTACT BY MS.
BRAESICH OF THE REGULATOR, HIS HONOUR MADE THAT TURNABOUT DECISION.
24.4.2012: The SAT made
its decision declaring that I am guilty of 13 professional misconduct and two
unsatisfactory conduct upon the same factual circumstances that I have been
declared not guilty of any misconduct but only of deficiency of professional
knowledge and therefore I should be put under supervisory practice. Both the
LPCC and myself was asked to make submissions on penalty.
29.5.2012: I made my
written submissions on Penalty which cannot be separated from the Merit Issues
which relates to the Jurisdictional Errors of SAT as contained in a
TABLE.
20.8.2012: The TABLE
OF JURISDICTIONAL ERRORS OF SAT was not taken into account and I was made to
pay a Penalty Costs of some $16k.
12.12.2012. The Full
Bench of the Supreme Court of Western Australia in response to the LPD2 of 2012
of the LPCC to remove me from the roll could not consider the TABLE OF
JURISDICTIONAL ERRORS OF SAT under s. 444 of the LP2008 because it is not
allowed to disturb the findings of SAT dated 24.4.2012.
As a result I was
denied my natural justice.
3.1.2013: I filed my
Notice of Appeal against the SAT Judgments and the Full Bench Judgments.
Signature: …………………………………………………….. Date: ……………………………
Part C – Further information
Supporting evidence
Please
attach copies of any documents that may help us investigate your complaint (for
example, letters, pay slips, doctor’s certificates or references). If you
cannot do this, please tell us about the documents or other evidence and how
this evidence can be obtained.
Business
Web site (Optional)
Your
Blog (Optional)
Fackbook
Page (Optional)
Twitter
Account (Optional)
and all court documents filed at the various courts.
How has this affected you?
Please
tell us how what you are complaining about has affected you?
It has put me into a psychological false imprisonment for
the years from 12.9.2006 until today and I have suffered all the pains and
sufferings of a person who had been deprived of his freedom as defined in the
article on false imprisonment in DAMAGES IN FALSE IMPRISONMENT MATTERS A Paper
Delivered by Mark A Robinson, Barrister, To a NSW Legal Aid Commission Seminar
in Sydney on 22 February 2008 found at:
What outcome are you seeking?
1) Damages for False Imprisonment.
2) Damages for Loss of Income for the
period from 12.9.2006 and continuing till today.
3) Damages for Loss of Reputation as an
Independent Lawyer.
4) Other damages deemed fit by this tribunal.
Have you made a complaint about this to another agency?
(For
example a state anti-discrimination or equal opportunity agency, a workers
compensation agency, an ombudsman or an industrial relations commission.)
If
so, you must provide details of the complaint, the agency it was made to and
any outcome. You should also attach copies of any letters you have received
from the agency.
No.
Have you tried to resolve your complaint in any other way?
(For
example through an internal complaint process or your trade union.)
If
so, please give details:
1.
I
have tried to resolve this complaint in so many ways through the State
Administrative Tribunals and the Supreme Court of Western Australia, the Court
of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia and the High Court of
Australia.
2.
They
are contained in my blogspots and my the Just Grounds Community Website.
Remember
to
sign and date page 6 of this document; and
attach
copies of any relevant documents.
Send your completed form to:
Director, Complaint Handling
Australian Human Rights Commission
GPO Box 5218
SYDNEY NSW 2001
29th day of January, 2013.
