The Foisted Unilateral Agreement

According to OPCA theory, a notarized document, sworn affidavit, notice of understanding intent and claim of right or other paperwork that is served by the offeror, becomes a valid contract or agreement of the parties after the expiry of an allotted time period. It is claimed that the terms are accepted by acquiescence, due to […]

The Driving v Travelling conundrum

The term "Driving" is understood as a "Commercial activity" to OPCA theorists - Instead of admitting to "Driving" (as described in the statute) they prefer to practice the "Common law right" to "Travel" in their "Private Automobiles" on "The Kings Highway". There is a great conundrum here, they cannot have a valid licence or registration, … Continue reading The Driving v Travelling conundrum

Registration: Ownership and Title

OPCA theory teaches that registering a vehicle with the state voids private ownership, transfers this to the state via the registration process, and therefore binds the operator to traffic regulation. It is theorised that one can "travel" with a vehicle as private property, but cannot do this with state property after registration. It is claimed … Continue reading Registration: Ownership and Title

Dax Coxon

News: "Gold Coast Pirates of the Caribbean actor says he will drive unlicensed again despite conviction": Gold Coast Pirates of the Caribbean actor says he will drive unlicensed again despite conviction. Dax Coxon, whose online profile says he starred alongside Johnny Depp in Pirates of the Caribbean 5: Dead Men Tell No Tales, filmed on … Continue reading Dax Coxon

Sam Jones

Sam Jones operates the Corporate Australia website. There are countless articles on his website relating to the "strawman" and "common law" myths, with an added twist of the "corporate government" myth to incite an emotional response from the reader, to "fire them up" about how truly terrible it is that we are living under occupation by a … Continue reading Sam Jones

Van den Hoorn v Ellis [2010] QDC 451

In Van den Hoorn v Ellis [2010] QDC 451 the appellant contended he was the “owner of the created fictions known as JOHAN HENDRICK VAN DEN HOORN and JOHN HENRY VAN DEN HOORN, being created fictions fraudulently owned and controlled by legal fictions” which included “australia inc” and “queensland inc”, as well as “queensland transport inc” … Continue reading Van den Hoorn v Ellis [2010] QDC 451

Governed under the Flora and Fauna Act

There are several misunderstandings regarding the effect of the national vote on the Constitution Alteration (Aboriginal People) more commonly known today as simply the 1967 referendum. At the time, Australian voters had backed only four of 24 constitutional referendums in all the years since Federation in 1901. This one passed with more than 90 per … Continue reading Governed under the Flora and Fauna Act

Early OPCA Influence in Australia

Throughout the 2000s, OPCA concepts became increasingly cross-contaminated. Foreign concepts and legislation, such as A4V and the Uniform Commercial Code became common features in OPCA legal proceedings in the Commonwealth, sometimes alone and sometimes in combination with domestic concepts. This borrowing is obvious in different movements, for example, the double or split person concept and … Continue reading Early OPCA Influence in Australia

The legal and lawful conundrum

OPCA theorists insist that the term "legal" describes legislation, (though it is something that is unenforceable except by individual "consent" via contract, otherwise known as "joinder") whereas "lawful" denotes the "real law", which the theorist holds as "the common law". The theory is that "lawful" protects one’s fundamental rights whereas "legal" attempts to "contract away" those … Continue reading The legal and lawful conundrum

I don’t stand under that law!

A popular myth with OPCA adherents is the "stand under" phobia, when replying to an officer's question: "do you understand?" The OPCA interpretation is that answering "YES" would create joinder in contract with the officer. The concept also implies that only if one individually "consents" to legislation, it then becomes enforceable, so they emphatically and frantically want … Continue reading I don’t stand under that law!

Interpreting legalese

Unusually, non-American OPCA adherents revere the U.S.-centric Black’s Law Dictionary, obsessively mining it for obscure Latin phrases scarcely used in modern courtrooms. Although very popular in OPCA circles, "Blacks Law Dictionary" cannot be used to interpret the meanings of Australian legal terms, and is therefore invalid in any Australian court. Law dictionaries are not often … Continue reading Interpreting legalese