Bookmark and Share
Previous article

News Articles

  • Administrative Courts
  • 04/02/2016 Make a Comment
  • Contributed by: Charles ( 12 articles in 2016 )
Click to receive your Free Guide
The Judiciary comprises two types of courts; a corporate "administrative court", and a Common Law “court of record”. A judge in an administrative court does not act judicially but as an administrator to settle contractual disputes. A judge in a court of record sits judicially with a “jury of the People”. The courts are attended by “Commercial List Judges”, some of whom are designated as “jury” judges for Common Law courts.

Common Law acknowledges the LAWFUL Rights possessed by living Men & Women.
Statutes apply Legislation to artificial LEGAL “Persons”.

A Statutory administrative court is for commerce, in practice (de facto). It is a place of corporate banking for settling contract “disputes” between legal “persons”, extracting “commercial value” penalties from living men and women who (may unwittingly) consent to “act” as legal “persons” obligated by (adhesion) contracts. Administrative courts are not sanctioned by Parliament, and are not part of the de jure laws and usages of the realm. All administrative courts are UNLAWFUL because they do not have a jury present.


'The law is absolutely clear on this subject. There is NO authority for administrative courts in this country, and no Act can be passed to legitimise them.' - Halsbury's Law 2011

A Common Law court is for justice with a jury, in law (de jure). It is a place of evidence analysis where a jury of one's peers determines what is factual, right or wrong, just and fair. The parties are living men and women, and their decisions attempt to repair harm or loss to one or more injured parties, and to provide protections for living people. The only venue of “justice” for a living man or woman is a Constitutionally sanctioned Common Law “court of record” with a jury.
A Common Law court de jure, with a Jury,
is the only venue of “Justice” for a living Man or Woman.

Administrative courts operate on assumptions and presumptions. The Crown makes the presumption that you are “acting” in "joinder" to the NAME. So when you rebut the presumption they have no jurisdiction and cannot proceed. Any further action is fraudulent. To rebut the presumption it is only necessary to correct the mistake in the NAME.

Presumption n. a rule of law which permits a court to assume a fact is true until such time as there is a preponderance (greater weight) of evidence which disproves or outweighs (rebuts) the presumption. Each presumption is based upon a particular set of apparent facts paired with established laws, logic, reasoning or individual rights. A presumption is rebuttable in that it can be refuted by factual evidence. One can present facts to persuade the judge that the presumption is not true.

Jurisdiction is over the NAME, Liability is attached to the NAME,
So correct the “mistake in the matter of the NAME”


    (Note: If wrong - comments will not be posted)

    1Will not be visible to public.
    2Receive notification of other comments posted for this article. To cease notification after having posted click here.
    3To make a link clickable in the comments box enclose in link tags - ie.<link>Link</link>.

    To further have your say, head to our forum Click Here

    To contribute a news article Click Here

    To view or contribute a Quote Click Here

    Hosting & Support by WebPal© 2020 All rights reserved.