MENU
Login form
Main » Articles » Articles

Notice Of Demand On Federal Judge
NOTICE OF DEMAND ON FEDERAL JUDGE

Below is a Notice of Demand I tried, on Wednesday 7 January 2004, to serve personally on the Honourable Justice Anthony Philip Whitlam after I received a letter from T. Morgan, Deputy District Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia Registry, Level 16, Law Courts Building, Queen's Square, Sydney saying "His Honour directed on 24 December 2003 pursuant to Order 46 Rule 7A that the Registrar (of the Federal Court of Australia) refuse to accept the documents (a General Application to the Court and its accompanying Affidavit - both of which also appear below) for filling.".

I had phoned the Judge (Tel: 9230 8527) that morning and asked if he would be in his chambers that afternoon so that I could serve him with this Notice of Demand.  He got quite irate and was not co-operative, at all.  When I went to the courthouse the behaviour of the clerks was also unco-operative and obstructive.  The Registry of the Federal Court is on the 16th floor and, after I announced what I was there to do,  another Deputy District Registrar, Miss/Mrs. A. Kavallaris, came to the counter and, in the course of another unpleasant verbal exchange, "I am turning you away and you can't see the Judge.".  I replied, "You'll have to get the sheriffs to remove me from this building." and she said, "If that's the way you want it.". She then went behind the screens and, after about 10 minutes, she came back and said the best she could do was "receive it and bring it to the attention of the Judge" - to which I replied, "That's hardly person(ally servicing the document)".  She agreed to write on a draft Affidavit of Service, which I had, "I received "Notice of Demand on the Honourable Justice Anthony Philip Whitlam" & I will arrange to bring it to his Honour's attention. S. Kavallaris Deputy District Registrar 7/1/04". When going to the lifts I came across one of the Registry's clerks talking to 2 sheriifs but did not talk to them. 

The essential elements of the Notice of Demand are that (a) his, and all Judge's appointments are fraud due to the fact that the Queen has no executive power in Australia and she does not appoint the Governor-General who must appoint the Judges, and (b) he is guilty of many offences from Treachery (Penalty: life imprisonment) to denying Trial by Jury (5 years imprisonment) to Judicial Corruption (10 years imprisonment), etc.. .     

************************************************************

NOTICE of DEMAND 
on the Honourable Justice Anthony Philip Whitlam

Applicant:John Wilson

Respondant:The Honourable Justice Anthony Philip Whitlam

Date:  5th January, 2004

I, John Wilson of 19 Elm Place, North Rocks in the State of New South Wales, contend that you operate outside the law.

I require answers relating to the subject matter of

1 your appointment to be a Justice of the Federal Court of Australia as required under section 72 of the United Kingdom Parliament's Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia (63 & 64 Victoria, Chapter 12) [9th July 1900].

2.your denying me the Right to Trial by Jury.

3.the identification for the head of power sanctioned by the United Kingdom Parliament's Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia (63 & 64 Victoria, Chapter 12) [9th July 1900]. Note specifically; covering clause 2 of this Act mandates the King or Queen in the U.K. and prohibits all other bodies.

4.the lineage of the head of power for the appointment according to law of the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia with regard to the previous points 1 and 3.

5.the instrument to establish at law that a Judgment to direct the Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia to refuse to accept my General Application to the Court and its accompanying Affidavit does not require the signature of the Justice to such an Order.


From my research into matters relating to this subject, I have established to the best of my abilities that :

1. The United Kingdom's Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia (63 & 64 Victoria.  Chapter 12) [9th July 1900] states, at covering clause 2, that "The provisions of this Act referring to the Queenshall extend to Her Majesty's heirs and successors in the sovereignty of the Unted Kingdom.". The words "shall extend" mandates the Queen of the United Kingdom exercise her executive powers in the Commonwealth of Australia, as well as prohibits any other body ftom exercising those powers. Any Act of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, such as the Royal Style and Titles Act 1973, to alter Her Majesty's status as Queen of the United Kingdom, as it is in the Royal Style and Titles Act No. 32 of 1953,  and legislate for 


"the adoption by Her Majesty, for use in relation to Australia and its Territories ... of the Style and Title ... of .. Queen of Australia" is ultra vires and Treachery, as defined in Section 24AA of the Crimes Act 1914 which carried the "Penalty: Imprisonment for life". 

2 . Section 72 of the United Kingdom's Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia (63 & 64 Victoria.  Chapter 12) [9th July 1900] lays down that Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second's representative,  the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia, appoints the Justices of the High Court and the other courts created by the Parliament of the Commonwealth.  However, emails transmissions I have received from the Privy Council Office in London on 19 August 2003,  2 Septemebr 2003 and 17 September 2003 say "I am sorry but there is no Order for this appointment" in reply to my asking about Orders-in-Council for the appointments of Major-general Michael Jeffery, Sir Ninian Stephen, William Hayden, Sir William Deane and Dr. Peter Hollingworth to be Governor-Generals of the Commonwealth of Australia. .
     
3.On 20 June 2003, I wrote to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in Whitehall, London. I received a letter in reply dated 11 July 2003 which said "The Queen, in her role as Head of State of the United Kingdom and as such advised by British ministers, has no executive power exercisable within the Commonwealth of Australia.". This conflicts with Section 61 of the United Kingdom's Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia (63 & 64 Victoria. Chapter 12) [9th July 1900] which states that "The executive power of the Commonwealth is vested in the Queen and is exercisable by the Governor-General as the Queen's representative".

4.The effect of information conveyed in the paragraphs 2 and 3 immediately above is that the appointments of the above mentioned Governor-Generals are invalid and the appointments of Judges by those Governor-Generals are, as a consequence, also invalid and neither the Governor-Generals nor the Judges have any jurisdiction or authority in the Commonwealth of Australia.

5.My Right to Trial by Jury is a Right guarantied under the Constitutional Laws of Magna Carta 1297, Petition of Right 1627, Habeas Corpus 1640 and Bill of Rights 1688 which have been in force in Australia since 25 July 1828 by virtue of the Imperial Act 9 George IV Chapter 83, and (b) I did not give my consent in any of the above mentioned actions to be without a Jury. Therefore, those courts had no jurisdiction to proceed summarily and those "awards, doings and proceeding" are "not (to) be drawn .. into consequence or example" (Petition of Right 1627), ie: the above mentioned judgments and orders are void. 

6.My Right to Trial by Jury is also protected by Section 43 of the NSW Imperial Acts Application Act 1969 No 30 wherein offenders, ie: persons who deny an Australian his/her Right to Trial by Jury, are "liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years". 

7.I have received a letter from the Deputy District  Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia dated 24 December 2003 saying that you "directed on 24 December pursuant to Order 46 Rule 7A that the Registrar refuse to accept the documents for filing", ie: the documents being my General Application to the Court and its accompanying Affidavit,  but there is no document carrying your signature to that effect nor are my documents stamped by 


the Federal Court to that effect. Without such endorsements and verification,  your Judgment is neither recorded nor substantive and is an abuse of due process.   


Given that my assertions are correct, there are apparent offences committed under the Crimes Act 1914 and many other Acts still to be pursued.

These are grave matters indeed.


Because of your failure to answer fundamental and important matters relating to your office, you are required by this demand, which is my right at common law, to answer the questions of the original letter as I have re-established in point form in this demand.

I demand you state the facts or rebut and correct my assertions within 14 days of the date of this letter.

TAKE NOTICE: If you do not comply with this demand within 14 days of this letter's date, it shall be taken that you and your office have not complied with the law in that you and your purported office are operating outside the law.

It shall be taken that you accept responsibility for every offence arising from your actions or omissions and subject to all penalties and damages according to law.

Failure by you to state the facts or rebut my assertions within 14 days and it shall be taken that my assertions outlined above are valid and that you do not have a defence to offer and shall offer no defence thereafter.



..(signed John Wilson)..........(signed Vince Fusca).......
ApplicantWitness (Justice of the Peace 9503247)


**************************************************************************
Form 5

GENERAL APPLICATION TO THE COURT

IN THE FEDERALCOURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

No: N                  of   2003


IN THE MATTER OF:  John Wilson
Applicant

AND:Deputy Commissioner of Taxation of 
the Commonwealth of Australia
First Respondent

Australian Taxation Office
(A.B.N.  51 824 753 556)
Second Respondent

Judge Norman Delaney
Third Respondent

Justice Kenneth Handley
Fourth Respondent

Justice David Hodgson
Fifth Respondent

Justice Michael Kirby
Sixth Respondent

Justice John Heydon
Seventh Respondent

The High Court of Australia
(A.B.N. 69 445 188 986)
Eighth Respondent

State of New South Wales
Ninth Respondent

Commonwealth of Australia
Tenth Respondent 


APPLICATION
(Form 5)
(Order 4, rule 1)

This is a cross-claim against these Respondents, ie: individuals, corporations and the Crown, for compensation for their denying me my Right to Trial by Jury where they have done so personally and where they are vicariously liable for those persons who have done so.  My Right to Trial by Jury is a Right guarantied under the Constitutional Laws of Magna Carta 1297,  Petition of Right 1627, Habeas Corpus 1640 and Bill of Rights 1688 which have been in force in Australia since 25 July 1828 by virtue of the Imperial Act 9 George IV Chapter 83.  This cross-claim claims compensation from the above Respondents for violations my Rights under Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Schedule 2 of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986) which guaranties that "in the determination of any criminal charge against (me), or (my) rights and obligations in a suit of law ... to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law" and "to defend (myself)". 


A.DETAILS OF CLAIM.
On the grounds stated in the accompanying affidavit the applicant claims:

1.THAT in the District Court of New South Wales at Parramatta on Wednesday 24 April 2002,  Judge Norman Delaney delivered four judgments and issued orders against me in the matter of Deputy Commissioner of Taxation -v- John Wilson, File No: 349/00.

2.THAT in the Supreme Court of New South Wales Sydney Registry Court of Appeal on 30 September 2002, Judges of Appeal Kenneth Handley and David Hodgson delivered a judgment and issued orders against me in the matter of John Wilson -v- Deputy Commissioner of Taxation, File No: 40398/02. 

3.THAT in the High Court of Australia Sydney Office of the Registry on 3 October 2003, Justices Michael Kirby and John Heydon delivered a judgment and issued orders against me in the matter of John Wilson -v- Deputy Commissioner of Taxation, File No: S368 of 2002.

4.THAT (a) my Right to Trial by Jury is a Right guarantied under the Constitutional Laws of Magna Carta 1297,  Petition of Right 1627, Habeas Corpus 1640 and Bill of Rights 1688 which have been in force in Australia since 25 July 1828 by virtue of the Imperial Act 9 George IV Chapter 83, and (b) I did not give my consent in any of the above mentioned actions to be without a Jury.  Therefore,  those courts had no jurisdiction to proceed summarily and those "awards, doings and proceeding" are "not (to) be drawn .. into consequence or example" (Petition of Right 1627), ie: the above mentioned judgments and orders are void. 

5.THAT (a)  Section 26 of the New South Wales's Supreme Court Act 1970 No. 52 lays down that Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second's representative, the Governor of New South Wales, appoints the Chief Justice and the Judges of the Supreme Court and Sectio 72 of the United Kingdom's Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia (63 & 64 Victoria. Chapter 12) [9th July 1900] lays down that Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second's representative, the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia, appoints the Justices of the High Court and the other courts created by the Parliament of the Commonwealth,  and (b) the Governor of New South Wales and the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia have not been appointed by Orders in Council from the Queen-in-Council, ie: the Privy Council.  Therefore, the appointments of the above mentioned Judges are invalid and they have no jurisdiction or authority to determine,  ie: those above mentioned judgments and orders are void.     

6.RELIEF in the form of (a) that the above judgments and orders, which are in respect of Bankruptcy Notice NN 2835/03, be set aside and (b) that those Respondent pay me compensation and damages of $AUD 25,000,000 (twenty five million dollars).

7.THAT is action be Trial by Jury.
  

B.CLAIM FOR INTERLOCUTORY RELIEF 
AND the applicant claims by way of interlocutory relief:

1.Bankruptcy Notice NN 2835/03 be stayed.

Date: ...22 December, 2003.

..(signed John Wilson).........
Applicant

C.NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS

TO the First Respondent of c/o Australian Government Solicitor, Piccadilly of Sydney, 133 Castlereagh St., Sydney, NSW 2000.

TO the Second Respondent of c/o Australian Government Solicitor, Piccadilly of Sydney, 133 Castlereagh St., Sydney, NSW 2000.

TO the Third Respondent of c/o Crown Solicitors Office,  60-70 Elizabeth St., Sydney, NSW 2000.

TO the Fourth Respondent of c/o Crown Solicitors Office, 60-70 Elizabeth St., Sydney, NSW 2000.
 
TO the Fifth Respondent of c/o Crown Solicitors Office,  60-70 Elizabeth St., Sydney, NSW 2000.

TO the Sixth Respondent of c/o Australian Government Solicitor, Piccadilly of Sydney, 133 Castlereagh St., Sydney, NSW 2000.

TO the Seventh Respondent of c/o Australian Government Solicitor, Piccadilly of Sydney, 133 Castlereagh St., Sydney, NSW 2000.

TO the Eighth Respondent of .c/o Australian Government Solicitor, Piccadilly of Sydney, 133 Castlereagh St., Sydney, NSW 2000

TO the Ninth Respondent of c/o Crown Solicitors Office,  60-70 Elizabeth St., Sydney, NSW 2000.

TO the Tenth Respondent of c/o Australian Government Solicitor, Piccadilly of Sydney, 133 Castlereagh St., Sydney, NSW 2000.

This application has been set down for the time and place stated below.  If you or your legal representative do not attand the Court at that time,  the application may be dealt with and judgment may be given, or an order made, in your absence. As soo after the time mentioned as the business of the Court will allow, any of the following may happen:

(a)the application may be heard;
(b)directions may be given for the further conduct of the proceeding;
(c)any application for interlocutory relief may be heard.

Before any attendance at Court,  you must file an appearance in the registry.

Time and date for hearing:

Place:Federal Court of Australia
Law Courts Building
Queen's Square
Sydney

D.ABRIDGMENT OF SERVICE

The time by which this application is to be served has been abridged by order made on ..................... to.................................
Date:
......................................................................................
an officer acting with the authority of the District Registrar

E.FILING AND SERVICE

This aplication is filed
by John Wilson
for John Wilson
whose address for service is
19 Elm Place, North Rocks, NSW 2151.

The applicant's address is
19 Elm Place, North Rocks, NSW 2151.

It is intended to serve this application on any person listed below:
Crown Solicitors Office, 60-70 Elizabeth St., Sydney, NSW 2000 and
Australian Government Solicitor, Piccadilly of Sydney, 133 Castlereagh St., Sydney, NSW 2000.


....(signed John Wilson)...............
Applicant

***********************************************************
Form 20

AFFIDAVIT


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

No. N ............................................... of 2003


IN THE MATTER OF John Wilson 


John Wilson
Applicant

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation of 
the Commonwealth of Australia
First Respondent

Australian Taxation Office
(A.B.N.  51 824 753 556)
Second Respondent

Judge Norman Delaney
Third Respondent

Justice Kenneth Handley
Fourth Respondent

______________________________________________________________

Filed by:
Name:  John Wilson
Address: 19 Elm Place, North Rocks, NSW 2151.
D.X:
Telephone: (02) 9630 2618.
Fax No:  (02) 9872 1661.
Ref:
Justice David Hodgson
Fifth Respondent

Justice Michael Kirby
Sixth Respondent

Justice John Heydon
Seventh Respondent

The High Court of Australia
(A.B.N. 69 445 188 986)
Eighth Respondent

State of New South Wales
Ninth Respondent

Commonwealth of Australia
Tenth Respondent 


AFFIDAVIT
(Form 20)
(Order 14 rule 2)


On ...22-12-03...., I, John Wilson of 19 Elm Place, North Rocks, NSW 2151, dentist,  say on oath-

1.In the District Court of New South Wales at Parramatta on Wednesday 24 April 2002, Judge Norman Delaney delivered four judgments and issued orders against me in the matter of Deputy Commissioner of Taxation -v- John Wilson, File No: 349/00.  Annexed hereto and marked "A" is a copy of that "Judgment" issued by the District Court of New South Wales at Parramatta. 

2.In the Supreme Court of New South Wales Sydney Registry Court of Appeal on 30 September 2002,  Judges of Appeal Kenneth Handley and David Hodgson delivered a judgment and issued orders against me in the matter of John Wilson -v- Deputy Commissioner of Taxation, File No: 40398/02. Annexed hereto and marked "B" is a copy of that "Judgment" issued by the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

3.In the High Court of Australia Sydney Office of the Registry on 3 October 2003,  Justices Michael Kirby and John Heydon delivered a judgment and issued orders against me in the matter of John Wilson -v- Deputy Commissioner of Taxation,  File No: S368 of 2002. Annexed hereto and marked "C" is a copy of that High Court of Australia transcript. 

4.I truly believe that (a) my Right to Trial by Jury is a Right guarantied under the Constitutional Laws of Magna Carta 1297,  Petition of Right 1627, Habeas Corpus 1640 and Bill of Rights 1688 which have been in force in Australia since 25 July 1828 by virtue of the Imperial Act 9 George IV Chapter 83, and (b) I did not give my consent in any of the above mentioned actions to be without a Jury.  Therefore,  those courts had no jurisdiction to proceed summarily and those "awards, doings and proceeding" are "not (to) be drawn .. into consequence or example" (Petition of Right 1627), ie: the above mentioned judgments and orders are void. 

5.I truly believe that (a)  Section 26 of the New South Wales's Supreme Court Act 1970 No. 52 lays down that Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second's representative, the Governor of New South Wales, appoints the Chief Justice and the Judges of the Supreme Court and Section 72 of the United Kingdom's Act to Constitute the Commonwealth of Australia (63 & 64 Victoria.  Chapter 12) [9th July 1900] lays down that Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second's representative, the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia, appoints the Justices of the High Court and the other courts created by the Parliament of the Commonwealth,  and (b) the Governor of New South Wales and the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia have not been appointed by Orders in Council from the Queen-in-Council, ie: the Privy Council.  Therefore, the appointments of the above mentioned Judges are invalid and they have no jurisdiction or authority to determine,  ie: those above mentioned judgments and orders are void.     

6.I truly believe that,  for Justice to be administered, the Jury in this action ought to make orders (i) that the above mentioned judgments and orders, which are in respect of Bankruptcy Notice NN 2835/03, be set aside and (b) that those Respondent pay me compensation and damages of $AUD 25,000,000 (twenty five million dollars). 


Sworn at .........Westmead..........................)
       )           ..(signed John Wilson).........
       )
before me:...(signed Helen Kaebor (?) J.P.. )
(Justice of the Peace)


Source: http://www.rightsandwrong.com.au/html/nod.html
Category: Articles | Added by: JennaRose (04.07.2013)
Views: 607 | Rating: 0.0/0
Total comments: 0
Name *:
Email *:
Code *:
APPETIZERS
The Spoonfed Truth Facebook
All Laws Exist In A Fiction
Gullibility Factor Test
Who Is Running America
The Truth About The British Monarchy
Requirement For Consent
Corporate Government
Dispatch of Merchants
A Primer On Martial Law
Unalienable vs. Inalienable
How We Give Our Power Away
The Mark of the Beast
Freedom From De Facto Laws
Crisis and Betrayal
SIDE DISHES
  • Build Freedom
  • Freedom School
  • Four Winds
  • Sovereign Education
  • Detax Canada
  • Foundation Of Truth
  • Search
    Copyright MyCorp © 2017 Create a free website with uCoz