Maxwell Hugh Wilson

The appellants received a sequestration order and failed to make out and file with the Official Receiver a statement of affairs, and were subsequently convicted. They contended that the manner in which the magistrate had proceeded was unlawful by virtue of the provisions about discrimination contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and filed an application for leave to appeal against their convictions, but the application was dismissed. They then applied for an extension of time to appeal, against the dismissal, which was heard in Wilson v White [2007] WASCA 87. The appellants asserted that the Federal Magistrates Court is not a Court because it is made up of single judicial officers, is not a Chapter III court for the purposes of the Constitution, and that since the passage of the Acts Amendment and Repeal (Courts and Legal Practice) Act 2003 (WA), the courts of Western Australia do not have lawful authority to administer law within the State. Further, that since they are Christians, they have an absolute right under Section 116 Australian Constitution to be tried in a Christian Court, with a jury of 12 the same number of jurors as were disciples of Jesus Christ, as provided for in the Scriptures of the King James version of the Holy Bible. The appellants insist the jurors swear their oath on the Holy Bible and not otherwise, and judge in the name of Jesus Christ, as the scriptures provide.

Click to access wilson-v-white-2007-wasca-87.pdf

The appellant was stopped while driving a vehicle, refused to identify himself, and was found to be driving with a disqualified licence. The situation escalated, resulting in him also being charged for obstructing a public officer in the performance of his functions. He was represented at the start by John Walsh, who advised the court that the defence raised matters under the Australian Constitution, requiring notices under s 78B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth). The magistrate expressed the view that while the defence asserted that there was a constitutional issue, the matters it was putting forward did not give rise to any constitutional point and it was unnecessary to issue the s 78B notices. It was agreed that the matter would be adjourned to a further directions hearing, when Dr Walsh would again appear for Mr Wilson.

Neither appeared for the hearing, so it proceeded in their absence under s 55 of the Criminal Procedure Act and he was convicted for all three offences. In Wilson v Garlett [20120 WASC 506 the court found that while it was correct for the simple offences, the magistrate erred in dealing with the offence of obstructing a public officer by the procedure under s 55 of the Criminal Procedure Act. All three convictions were set aside pending remittance to the Magistrates Court for determination. 

Click to access wilson-v-garlett-2012-wasc-506.pdf

At the retrial the defendant was asked whether his name was read aloud in capital letters, and declared he was “Maxwell Hugh of the family Wilson”. The magistrate concluded Wilson was absent, ordered his arrest, which then occurred and the trial proceeded. He was found guilty of these offences and obstructing the police officer. The matter was appealed in Wilson v Western Australia Police [2014] WASC 77, on the grounds that the original decision was in error because the magistrate attempted “…to force Maxwell Hugh Wilson to accept that his name was a legal fiction being Maxwell Hugh WILSON contrary to his birth certificate”, and that it was wrong to jail Wilson for Wilson’s refusal “to accept the fraudulent name”, and that the court and legislation were invalid. The appeal was dismissed as having no reasonable prospect of success.

Click to access wilson-v-western-australia-police-2014-wasc-77.pdf

The further appeal in Wilson v Western Australia Police [2014] WASCA 145 alleged defective court authority, and was also dismissed as frivolous and vexatious.