Tag: Magna Carta

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 →

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 →

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

In National Australia Bank v Walter [2004] VSC 36 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 alleged apprehended bias … Continue reading National Australia Bank v Walter [2004] VSC 36 →

Daniels v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation [2007] SASC 114

The proceedings in Daniels v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation [2007] SASC 114 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 … 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 →

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 →

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 →

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    →

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 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. The Courier Mail: "Australian separatist Mark Andrew Pytellek held over courtroom brawl": Mark Pytellek has been running paid workshops teaching sovereign citizen concepts under variations of … Continue reading Mark Pytellek →