Montgomery v Child Support Registrar [2015] FCA 891

The applicant was $46,596.87 in arrears for child support, and was prevented in leaving Australia due to a Departure Prohibition Order, and subsequently filed for an appeal of this decision in Montgomery v Child Support Registrar [2015] FCA 891. The lengthy notice served by the applicant contained 81 separate statements which the applicant required the … Continue reading Montgomery v Child Support Registrar [2015] FCA 891

O’Hagan v Commissioner of Taxation [2020] QDC 288

In O’Hagan v Commissioner of Taxation [2020] QDC 288 the applicant was found guilty after a summary trial of four offences of failing when and as required pursuant to a taxation law to give a return to the Commissioner of Taxation. The appellant appealed his conviction and sentence on grounds that included the Magistrates Court … Continue reading O’Hagan v Commissioner of Taxation [2020] QDC 288

National Australia Bank Limited v Norman [2012] VSC 14

In National Australia Bank Limited v Norman [2012] VSC 14 the court noted: "The counterclaim was comprised of random, almost incomprehensible, statements, propositions, quotations, argument and references to other material that appeared to have been lifted from other documents and randomly pasted into the pleading.  Passages were quoted from Magna Carta and the Bible." The defendants argued that … Continue reading National Australia Bank Limited v Norman [2012] VSC 14

Shields v Cbfc Limited [1994] FCA 1311

In Shields v Cbfc Limited [1994] FCA 1311 the appellants alleged bias by the primary judge, denying that they were obliged to make payments on a rent contract because the alleged debt was “created by the respondent as a book entry credit at no cost whatsoever”. The appellants filed extracts from “a manual, “How to Screw … Continue reading Shields v Cbfc Limited [1994] FCA 1311

Grey v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [1993] FCA 54

In Grey v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [1993] FCA 54 the plaintiffs claimed that the loan was created by “book-entry credit” and is therefore false, misleading, and should not be enforced, and insisted if the bank was "entitled to create cost-free book-entry credit and that book-entry credit so created is valid in law … Continue reading Grey v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [1993] FCA 54

Fisher v Westpac Banking Corporation [1992] FCA 390

In Fisher v Westpac Banking Corporation [1992] FCA 390, the plaintiffs alleged a misleading and deceptive, criminal conspiracy by all the bank to strip them of their assets, purporting "book entries which did not represent the commitment of "legal tender", referring to the Credit River decisions, and other references in a publication titled “How to screw … Continue reading Fisher v Westpac Banking Corporation [1992] FCA 390

Arnold v State Bank of South Australia [1992] FCA 554

In Arnold v State Bank of South Australia [1992] FCA 554 the applicants sought to block a foreclosure on their farm, alleging that “... the mortgage involved the creation by the State Bank of a book-entry credit at no cost to itself.”, so the loan was unsupported by consideration. It was further contended that the Magna Carta … Continue reading Arnold v State Bank of South Australia [1992] FCA 554

Patrick Cusack

Patrick Cusack ran a variety of arguments based in the validity of the currency and also reliance on imperial enactments. In Cusack, Patrick Leo v Australian Electoral Commissioner [1984] FCA 400 1 the applicant sought review of decision not to accept the applicant's nomination for the House of Representatives Election unless it was accompanied by deposit … Continue reading Patrick Cusack

Brian Charles Fyffe

In Fyffe v State of Victoria [1999] VSCA 196 the applicant, who was renting a property through the Ministry for Conservation, Forests and Lands, claimed to have seceded the property from the State of Victoria, and by virtue of his diplomatic status he and the land are protected by international law from any claimed sovereignty … Continue reading Brian Charles Fyffe

Pavlomanolakos v National Australia Bank [1993] FCA 29

In Pavlomanolakos v National Australia Bank [1993] FCA 29, the applicant filed a document entitled "Notice of Constitutional Matters" claiming that "the creation of book-entry credits by Banks and other financial institutions" was unconstitutional, that a mortgage should not be enforced because its funds were "created by the (Bank) as a book-entry credit ‘out of thin … Continue reading Pavlomanolakos v National Australia Bank [1993] FCA 29

Koula Rafailidis

Koula Rafailidis 1 is an OPCA adherent from New South Wales, and a long time admin of the Get out of paying fines, rego, fees, tolls and rates 2 and several other Facebook groups. In Camden Council v Rafailidis [2012] NSWLEC 51 3 the respondents were found in breach of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act … Continue reading Koula Rafailidis

Ledger Acquisitions Australia MB Pty Ltd v Kiefer [2014] FCCA 2216

The respondent made an application for review of the making of a sequestration order against his estate, but the court ordered that the application for review be dismissed, and published its reasons for judgment in Ledger Acquisitions Australia MB Pty Ltd v Kiefer [2014] FCCA 2216. The grounds in the submissions challenged the jurisdiction of … Continue reading Ledger Acquisitions Australia MB Pty Ltd v Kiefer [2014] FCCA 2216

Ashwell v Commissioner for Consumer Protection [2015] WASC 337

The appellant was convicted of two counts of breaching the prescribed requirements for warranties against defects and one count of making a false or misleading representation concerning the exclusion of a right or remedy, in his business. The appeal in Ashwell v Commissioner for Consumer Protection [2015] WASC 337 was also against the sentences imposed. … Continue reading Ashwell v Commissioner for Consumer Protection [2015] WASC 337

National Australia Bank v Walter [2004] VSC 36; 1 BFRA 509

In National Australia Bank v Walter [2004] VSC 36; 1 BFRA 509 the applicants raised a number of unorthodox arguments, including entitlement to trial by jury under Magna Carta, contended that the Constitution Act 1975 (Vic) is invalid on the ground that there is no proof that Queen Elizabeth II gave it royal assent, and … Continue reading National Australia Bank v Walter [2004] VSC 36; 1 BFRA 509

Daniels v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation [2007] SASC 114

Daniels v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation [2007] SASC 114 These proceedings arose due to the respondent’s unfaltering stance that contributing monies to purposes associated with abortion indirectly through taxation, is contrary to his beliefs and faith as a Christian. The respondent contacted the ATO for the purpose of suggesting his taxation liability be reduced by … Continue reading Daniels v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation [2007] SASC 114

Smart v Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2002] VSCA 111

In Smart v Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2002] VSCA 111 the appellant resisted a mortgage foreclosure, firstly insisting on a right to trial by jury under the Magna Carta, and further contending that no moneys were lent, but only credit created by book entry, which was unlawful because the only lawful mode … Continue reading Smart v Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd [2002] VSCA 111

Alberta judge bars new ‘pseudo law’ advocate who claims Magna Carta puts her outside court’s authority

First there were the “detaxers,” who claimed that their physical, human selves were exempt from taxation rules. Then came the “freemen of the land” who said Canadian law only applied to them if they consented to it. Most didn’t. Now a lengthy Alberta court decision has revealed a new version of what legal experts term “pseudo law,” … Continue reading Alberta judge bars new ‘pseudo law’ advocate who claims Magna Carta puts her outside court’s authority

Keith Knights

Another adherent in New South Wales who's pseudo legal arguments fell flat when presented in court was Keith Knights. He released several videos on YouTube, 1 and the frustration increased incrementally over the "corrupt courts and cops" not upholding "the true law". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=302WOPwqeHg&list=PLQwddV7_clWrQiBWFue0ct7NtUqcOy9Qw His final Facebook Live video 2 encouraged viewers to "rise up" and … Continue reading Keith Knights

Flowers v State of New South Wales [2020] NSWSC 526

In Flowers v State of New South Wales [2020] NSWSC 526 the applicant sought to order that his claim for damages for malicious prosecution be heard by a jury, and that his application for a jury should itself be determined by a jury. In a very impressive document headed “Challenge to the Jurisdiction of the … Continue reading Flowers v State of New South Wales [2020] NSWSC 526

Green and Green [2018] FCWA 42

Green and Green [2018] FCWA 42 A property dispute between two self represented litigants, the husband had in the past conducted his own proceedings before the Magistrates Court, District Court, Supreme Court of Western Australia, the Court of Appeal and the High Court, resulting in the Supreme Court declaring him a vexatious litigant on the … Continue reading Green and Green [2018] FCWA 42

Nick Peters

In the primary court prior to Peters v Pimm Pty Ltd [2019] QCA 306 the magistrate found that the applicant had not proved the facts to support his claim, and it was dismissed, and he then appealed to challenge the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal.  He informed the court that he had discovered that “judges of the … Continue reading Nick Peters

Alan Skyring

Allan Skyring ran the section 115 currency argument persistently for many years. He raised the argument again in 2013, defending a speeding fine. After it was rejected by Magistrate Springer in the Brisbane Magistrates Court, Skyring also applied for a judicial review in Re Skyring [2013] QSC 197 1 on the grounds that there was … Continue reading Alan Skyring

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Bonaccorso (No 1 2 & 3) [2016] NSWSC 595/766/1018

The defendant challenges the Deputy Commissioner’s standing, and the existence of the legislative scheme under which the proceedings are pursued; the Court’s jurisdiction and indeed, its existence; the very existence of Australia as a nation; the existence of the Constitution as a law under which the Federal Parliament enacts statutes, and whether certain statutes have … Continue reading Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Bonaccorso (No 1 2 & 3) [2016] NSWSC 595/766/1018

Independent Sovereign State of Australia

Cameron v Beattie [2001] QCA 392 "For reasons that will become apparent I shall refer to the appellant by his full name Donald Gordon Cameron.  He brought an action in the Supreme Court for declaratory relief, including a declaration that the latest State election was invalid.  His statement of claim was summarily dismissed by Justice … Continue reading Independent Sovereign State of Australia

Sill v City of Wodonga [2017] VSC 671

Sill v City of Wodonga [2017] VSC 671 This is a case about a disputed $22.50 dog licence fee.  To use the words of the applicant in his written case: "This case started with a notice from my Local Government Office in Wodonga, the notice said I had to pay for a $22.50 annual dog … Continue reading Sill v City of Wodonga [2017] VSC 671

Canaway v Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Water [2009] QLC 0120   

In Canaway v Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Water [2009] QLC 0120 the appellant submitted that the Constitution is invalid and the Queen is not Head of State, citing Fitzgibbon v HM Attorney General [2005] EWHC 114 (Ch) that the Letters Patent issued under the Great Seal of Australia in appointing a Governor General … Continue reading Canaway v Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Water [2009] QLC 0120   

Essenberg v The Queen [2000] HCATrans 297

Essenberg v The Queen [2000] HCATrans 297: "McHUGH J: I understand that and persons who have not had full legal training often think of Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights as fundamental documents which control governments, but they do not. After all, Magna Carta was the result of an agreement between the barons and … Continue reading Essenberg v The Queen [2000] HCATrans 297

Carnes v Essenberg [1999] QCA 339

Carnes v Essenberg [1999] QCA 339: "The supremacy of Parliament to make laws contrary to what had been the Common Law is expressly recognised by the Courts. It is enough to refer to the decision of the High Court in Kable v. The Director of Public Prosecutions, 189, Commonwealth Law Reports 51 at pages 73 … Continue reading Carnes v Essenberg [1999] QCA 339

Hubner v Erbacher [2004] QDC 345

In Hubner v Erbacher [2004] QDC 345 the appellant had homemade number plates attached to his vehicle as if it were a number plate issued pursuant to the regulation. He directed his arguments towards demonstrating that either the relevant regulation was not a valid law or that other legal rights, which he claimed to have, prevailed … Continue reading Hubner v Erbacher [2004] QDC 345

The Supremacy of Parliament

"It behooves us to remember that men can never escape being governed. They either must govern themselves or they must submit to being governed by others. If from lawlessness or fickleness, from folly or self-indulgence, they refuse to govern themselves, then most assuredly in the end they will have to be governed from the outside. … Continue reading The Supremacy of Parliament

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

Mark Pytellek

Mark Andrew Borleis 1 is also known as Mark Andrew Pytellek. In 2006 he claimed Magistrate White owed him 6.5 million for rejecting his defence and upholding the states traffic laws. Mark Pytellek has been running paid workshops teaching sovereign citizen concepts under variations of the name "Solutions Empowerment" 2 for at least a decade. … Continue reading Mark Pytellek

Wayne Glew

Wayne Kenneth Glew 1 has an extensive OPCA and constitutional litigation history.  In fact, the decisions made in Wayne's cases are relied upon, whenever similar contentions are brought before courts today, and in many cases they have become precedent in the particular point of law. Here is a brief summary of cases past:  Glew & … Continue reading Wayne Glew

John Wilson

73-year-old John Wilson 1 does not look like your stereotypical terrorist. Hunched and with the remains of his white hair flying from the sides of his head, the former dentist is a regular fixture outside NSW courts. Spouting his hyperbole about being a Sovereign Citizen, he appears to be a harmless eccentric. But to NSW … Continue reading John Wilson

Magna Carta and Bill of Rights

The Magna Carta  OPCA theorists in Australia insist that Article 61 of the Magna Carta grants them the right to "lawful rebellion" if the charter is breached. If they are seeking some sort of judicial permission to rebel, unfortunately the law does not recognise this point. Historic record shows that Clause 61 of the 1215 … Continue reading Magna Carta and Bill of Rights