Waddington v State of Victoria [2018] VSC 746

In Waddington v State of Victoria [2018] VSC 746 the plaintiff sought relief against the State of Victoria, the Sheriff for the State of Victoria, Kirk Branton (Sheriff’s Officer) and Victoria Police, regarding 605 infringement warrants totalling $146,824.27, for driving an unregistered vehicle in a toll zone. The fines were not paid and enforcement orders … Continue reading Waddington v State of Victoria [2018] VSC 746

Freilich v Lambert [2007] QDC 157

Freilich v Lambert [2007] QDC 157: "The appellant in this matter drives a vehicle in the State of Queensland, and has obtained the vehicle registration with an association of electors known as UPMART, which vehicle registration exists pursuant to common law, constitutional law, and any other holy and righteous grounds, and which registration satisfies the … Continue reading Freilich v Lambert [2007] QDC 157

Barrett-Lennard v Bembridge [2015] WASC 353

In BarrettLennard -v- Bembridge [2015] WASC 353 the appellant contended Biblical law is supreme and that the magistrate refused to hear Biblical references as vowed to be upheld by its supreme governor Queen Elizabeth II in her Coronation oath, and that due to Deuteronomy 4:2 Christians cannot be compelled to hold a drivers licence, give accurate details … Continue reading Barrett-Lennard v Bembridge [2015] WASC 353

Harkness v Roberts; Kyriazis v County Court of Victoria (No 2) [2017] VSC 646

These two cases were initially heard together by Bell J in the Supreme Court in Harkness v Roberts; Kyriazis v County Court of Victoria (No 2) [2017] VSC 646, (Kyriazis v County Court of Victoria (No 1) [2017] VSC 636 was an application to audio-record a judicial review proceeding by a self-represented party). In this … Continue reading Harkness v Roberts; Kyriazis v County Court of Victoria (No 2) [2017] VSC 646

Spajic v Robertson & Ors [2007] NSWSC 553

In Spajic v Robertson & Ors [2007] NSWSC 553 the applicant contended that legislation which directs that vehicles be registered in a particular way is monopolistic, and an alternative registration process exists under common law with a union of people called UPMART. The Court held there is no basis upon which some group of people can … Continue reading Spajic v Robertson & Ors [2007] NSWSC 553

Rainima v Magistrate Freund [2008] NSWSC 944

Rainima v Magistrate Freund [2008] NSWSC 944: "It seems that the group (UPMART) holds strong views about the legitimacy of aspects of this State’s traffic legislation. Certainly, the plaintiff does. Whatever the views of the group might be, this appeal turns upon the attitude of the plaintiff as it was articulated by her in the … Continue reading Rainima v Magistrate Freund [2008] NSWSC 944

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

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