Costa v St. George Bank – A Division Of Westpac Banking Corporation [2013] WASCA 137

In Costa v St. George Bank – A Division Of Westpac Banking Corporation [2013] WASCA 137 the appellant contended he “neither consents nor agrees to any Statute law”, and “will not consent to the jurisdiction of any other so-called court especially a Masters Chamber – which is really just a Star Chamber”, and that as the bank had issued a financing statement in 2011, it was therefore a foreclosed corporation by the UCC Filing by One Peoples Public Trust. He deposed to the fact that he had built the properties in question and that they represent ‘flesh and blood human being’s toil in life’; that he wishes to assert a claim of unconscionable conduct against the respondent and that the Federal Court of Australia is the ‘correct jurisdiction’ to hear his claim. Further:

“The Appellant submits that pursuant to the ruling of Justice Latham in the Uniform Tax Case in the High Court of Australia – HCA 1942 (65 CLR 373 at 408) – in this regard – ‘Common expressions such as: “The Courts have declared a statute invalid”,’ says Chief Justice Latham, ‘sometime lead to misunderstanding. A pretend law made in excess of power is not and never has been a law at all. Anybody in the country is entitled to disregard it.’ Naturally, he will feel safer if he has a decision of a court in his favour, but such a decision is not an element that produces invalidity in any law. The law is not valid until a court pronounces against it – and thereafter invalid. If it is beyond power it is void ab initio’.”

Click to access costa-v-st.-george-bank-a-division-of-westpac-banking-corporation-2013-wasca-137-.pdf

Leave a Reply