111006-Julia Gillard MP - Misuse of Trademark - WARRANT - Suspension of Pension - Etc

5
Julia Gillard PM C/o "R.McClelland.MP@aph.gov.au" <R.McClelland.MP@aph.gov.au> Cc:

.
6-10-2011
Tony Abbott Tony.Abbott.MP@aph.gov.au

George Brandis MP (Shadow Attorney-General) senator.brandis@aph.gov.au
10
Robert CmcClelland Attorney-General R.McClelland.MP@aph.gov.au Mr Robert Clark MP Attorney-General robert.clark@parliament.vic.gov.au
15
Ted Baillieu Premier of Victoria
ted.baillieu@parliament.vic.gov.au
Mr Grey Chief Magistrate, Magistrates Court of Victoria Ground Floor, 277 William Street Melbourne Vic 3000 C/o help@magistratescourt.vic.gov.au
20
COMPLAI TS (misuse of Trademark Bank account - Warrants Pensions etc)

.
25
Julia, it is my view that the State of Victoria having registered the trademark CIVIC COMPLIANCE VICTORIA is using itself through its department as well as has allowed Tenix Solutions to misuse and abuse the trademark CIVIC COMPLIANCE VICTORIA and forthwith the trademark should be cancelled/suspended pending a inquiry. It is clearly used in a manner to deceive the general public as to who really is receiving monies, etc.
Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. HIGGI S.-Suppose the sentry is asleep, or is in the swim with the other power?
30
Mr. GORDO .-There will be more than one sentry. In the case of a federal law, every member of a state Parliament will be a sentry, and, every constituent of a state Parliament will be a sentry. As regards a law passed by a state, every man in the Federal Parliament will be a sentry, and the whole constituency behind the Federal Parliament will be a sentry. END QUOTE
.
35
40
I understand from media reports that Robert Clark Attorney-General for the State of Victoria and others have proposed to the Commonwealth that it should suspend pensions and other welfare payments when a warrant is outstanding against a person who ordinary is entitled to a pension/welfare payment. While on first look this might be deemed a very good idea as a CO STITUTIO ALIST I urge you that we do however have to consider what the Framers of the Constitution had to say:
.
45
50
HA SARD 8-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the ational Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. HIGGI S.-I did not say that it took place under this clause, and the honorable member is quite right in saying that it took place under the next clause; but I am trying to point out that laws would be valid if they had one motive, while they would be invalid if they had another motive. END QUOTE
.
HA SARD 17-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. OCO OR.6-10-2011 Page 1 PLEASE OTE: Until our website Http://www.office-of-the-guardian.com has been set up to operate the website Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com will be the alternative website for contact details. help@office-of-the-guardian.com FREE downloading of documents from http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati
We must remember that in any legislation of the Commonwealth we are dealing with the Constitution. Our own Parliaments do as they think fit almost within any limits. In this case the Constitution will be above Parliament, and Parliament will have to conform to it. END QUOTE
.
10
HA SARD 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. GORDO .- The court may say-"It is a good law, but as it technically infringes on the Constitution we will have to wipe it out." END QUOTE
.
15
HA SARD 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. BARTO .- The position with regard to this Constitution is that it has no legislative power, except that which is actually given to it in express terms or which is necessary or incidental to a power given. END QUOTE
.
20
Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. HIGGI S.-The particular danger is this: That we do not want to give to the Commonwealth powers which ought to be left to the states. The point is that we are not going to make the Commonwealth a kind of social and religious power over us. END QUOTE
25
Therefore the issue is that it is not for the Commonwealth to engage in social experiments and let alone to abuse its position by somehow not just deny a person their lawful entitlements but to cause mayhem and to even so indirectly cause social unrest, mayhem, etc. There used to be a time when a WARRA T issue was deemed to be for extreme purposes such as a person failing to appear before the court when required to do so and/or being subject to suspicion of serious crimes and/or being a fugitive, etc, but these days as I have exposed the Victorian Parliament has engineered that when a person like myself allegedly was speeding 5 kilometres then despite my insistence to take me to court to prove this the Victorian Government has provided that then Tenix Solutions a private company using the trademark CIVIC COMPLIANCE VICTORIA albeit not a registered business entity, then can issue court orders and warrants as if they were issued by the Magistrates Court of Victoria. It even issue Sheriffs Office correspondence as well as being the so called enforcement agency and as such it totally disregard the separation of powers and on behalf of the government then issue warrants and court orders sidestepping the impartial judiciary. Hence by this having caused the issue of a warrant against me while having denied me a hearing in an open court as to the allegations pertaining myself. As such this is terrorism and extortion that I view should never be permitted to be allowed in any jurisdiction and certainly not be supported by the Commonwealth. While CIVIC COMPLIANCE VICTORIA is operating bank accounts it is not a registered business at all and so one has to ask how on earth could it siphon monies from the public without any legal accountability as surely the Commonwealth with its 100 point system cannot tolerate this kind of abuse. Documents are forwarded to citizens by the police, the court and the Sheriff Office as to referring to making payments to CIVIC COMPLIANCE VICTORIA but no such business entity exist! The fact that Tenix Solutions may use a trademark belonging to the State of Victoria itself doesnt permit one to use it as a business entity where billions of dollars are being paid into. As clearly CIVIC COMPLIANCE VICTORIA is operating as a unregistered business then I view this in itself ought to be fully investigated by the Commonwealth Attorney-General. I view that the Commonwealth cannot engage in such despicable attempts to sideline the courts and to force people to pay up on alleged speeding offences without having so to say their day in court and in effect the Commonwealth would, if it participated in this extortion scheme then prevent any person to pay, if they desired to do so, because there is no monies coming in and rather cause directly or indirectly a person to resort to crime to obtain monies otherwise.
6-10-2011 Page 2 PLEASE OTE: Until our website Http://www.office-of-the-guardian.com has been set up to operate the website Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com will be the alternative website for contact details. help@office-of-the-guardian.com FREE downloading of documents from http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati
30
35
40
45
50
55
HA SARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. CLARK.for the protection of certain fundamental rights and liberties which every individual citizen is entitled to claim that the federal government shall take under its protection and secure to him. END QUOTE
.
10
HA SARD18-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.The right of a citizen of this great country, protected by the implied guarantees of its Constitution, END QUOTE
.
HA SARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE
15
.
Mr. BARTO .-Our civil rights are not in the hands of any Government, but the rights of the Crown in prosecuting criminals are. END QUOTE Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. HIGGI S.-But suppose they go beyond their power? Mr. GORDO .-It is still the expression of Parliament. Directly a Ministry seeks to enforce improperly any law the citizen has his right. END QUOTE
.
20
25
30
As I stated above I have pursued that the allegations levelled by the police against my person are to be tested in an open court and this I view is the right of every citizen and is embedded in our constitution as a legal principle. Obviously the Government desires no such thing because it just is after revenue raising and not at all as to pursue a democratic society to be maintained.
Marriage of Baines ( o. 2) (1981) 7 Fam LR 232 at 237;QUOTE We recognise that each party is entitled to a Fair and Proper trial and to an adequate opportunity to adduce relevant evidence and to test the quality and veracity of the evidence adduced by the other party. E D QUOTE
.
35
40
Marriage of Baines (1981) 7 Fam LR 226 at 229 QUOTE The adversary system involves the presentation of facts ascertained by questions put to witnesses, or legal representations to the court. The role of the judge is that of adjudicator. This does not mean that he can ask no questions but he is at common law restricted in that he cannot in general call witnesses himself. E D QUOTE OMYCHU D v BARKER (1744) Chancery 1 Atk, 21; Willes 538; 1 Wils K>B> 84; 26 E. R. 15 QUOTE Willis C.J. There can be no evidence admitted without oath, it would be absurd for him to swear according to the Christian oath, which he does not believe; and therefore, out of necessity, he must be allowed to swear according to his own notion an oath I cannot say I lay a great stress upon the authors which give am account of the Gentoo religion, because it must depend upon their veracity and private judgment; but I found my opinion upon the certificate which says, the Gentoos believe in a God as the Creator of the universe, and that he is rewarder of those who do well, and an avenger of those who do ill E D QUOTE
.
45
50
55
60
Project Blue Sky v Australian Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28 (28 April 1998) Dawson J pointed out in Hunter Resources Ltd v Melville when discussing the statutory provision in that case: "substantial compliance with the relevant statutory requirement was not possible. Either there was compliance or there was not."
END QUOTE
The reasoning of Fullagar J in Clayton v. Heffron (supra) in relation to the provisions of s 5B of the Constitution Act 1902 ( SW) is material in this context: 5
QUOTE "A manner and form are prescribed by section 5B, and that manner and form must be observed if a valid law is to be produced. Any prescription of manner and form may be repealed or amended, but, while it stands, the process prescribed by it must be followed. That was decided Trethowan's case and I think that the whole of what is prescribed by section 5B relates to manner and form. It does not seem to me to be possible to say that some of the requirements of the section are matters of manner and form while others are not. The section describes one entire process - a series of steps, one following on another - and only the completion of the entire process can produce a valid law." (Supra at 262) END QUOTE TAYLOR v. TAYLOR [1979] HCA 38; (1979) 143 CLR 1 (22 August 1979) (Folder 1)
10
15
20
Similarly in Commissioner of Police v. Tanos (1958) 98 CLR 383, at p 395, Dixon C.J. and Webb J. said that QUOTE it is a deep-rooted principle of the law that before anyone can be punished or prejudiced in his person or property by any judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding he must be afforded an adequate opportunity of being heard. E D QUOTE
Infringement Act 2006 (Vic)

QUOTE
25
14. Payment to be within time specified An infringement penalty must be paid within the period specified in the infringement notice, being a period not less than 28 days after an infringement notice has been served.
END QUOTE
30
35
40
One find that the Victorian Parliament legislated that the Infringement Court (Read Tenix Solutions) must issue after 28 days a warrant upon the details provided by the enforcement agency even so no such details were provided under oath (this includes an affirmation) and the Police provided for 42 days. As such there is also a conflict that a WARRANT must be issued even so the legal process to pay still is not exceeded. Considering the Jododex legal principle (Forster v Jododex Australia Pty Ltd (1972) 127 CLR 421 at 445 The true version of the judgement under 5;) the warrant for this also was defective and without legal force but the Commonwealth, if it were to participate in this nonsense would suspend a pension/welfare payment upon such warrant? Come on, the system is hijacked for government revenue gains and I view the Commonwealth is bound to oppose any participation in this and should investigate if the conduct of Tenix Solutions and/or others operating CIVIC COMPLIANCE VICTORIA as some business entity without being registered for this as such is in fact unlawful and what, if any prosecutions should be pursued.
.
QUOTE 27 Junly 2011
45
OTICE OF REVOCATIO REFUSAL Infringements Court Case umber: 1158210495 12/07/11 Date of Enforcement Order: 0201683566 RIKATI TRAFFIC CAMERA OFFICE Infringement otice umber: Vehicle Registration umber: Enforcement Agency:
50
Your application for revocation has been refused, as the Infringements Registrar is not satisfied that there are sufficient "rounds to revoke/cancel the order. The amount of $243.90 must be paid to this office by 7 Sep 11 or a warrant may be issued.
If you do not agree with the Infringements Registrar's decision in this matter, you may elect to object and have your Application for Revocation heard by a Magistrate in open court. You will be required to attend the hearing. If you wish to object, you must do so in writing. Your written objection, quoting the Infringements Court Case Number, must be received by the Infringements Registrar within 42 days of the date of this letter. The Infringements Registrar does not have the power to reconsider your application as this can only be done by a Magistrate in open court.
10
Infringements Registrar
END QUOTE 27 july 2011
15
20
Counting 42 days from the 27 July 2011 date would mean it commences to count from midnight 27 July 2011 and then from midnight to midnight each subsequent day. By this the 42nd day expired on 8 September 2001. But as shown below I had already provided even an 110830 ADDRESS TO THE COURT regarding the matter to be heard in open court and despite this no open court hearing eventuated because it is a computer system as I understand it to be operated by Tenix solution that simply deals with matters. The warrant issue therefore defies legislative provisions and has no legal validity yet nevertheless if the Victorian Attorney-General gets his way then he would have any Commonwealth payment cancelled/suspended to terrorise me and anyone else for that matter who insist on their legal rights to have their day in court. Forster v Jododex Australia Pty Ltd (1972) 127 CLR 421 at 445 The true version of the judgement under 5;
QUOTE That where an instrument prescribes that a period of time may elapse between one event and another, the words at least, not less than and not later than, unless the context or the subject matter reveals contrary intention, should be regarded as indicating that a clear or full period of time must expire between the two events. There is some authority for saying that the use, in a statute prescribing a time limit, of such expressions as "at least" and "not less than" indicate an intention that the specified number of "clear days" must elapse between two acts or events (see R. v. Justices of Shropshire (1838) 8 Ad & E 173 (112 ER 803); Young v. Higgon (1840) 6 M & W 49 (151 ER 317); Chambers v. Smith (1843) 12 M & W 2 (152 ER 1085); In re Railway Sleepers Supply Co. (1885) 29 Ch D 204 and Ex parte McCance; Re Hobbs (1926) 27 SR (NSW) 35; 44 WN 43). But it is clear, I think, that significance is attached to such expressions as "at least" or "not less than" only in cases where the immediate purpose of the prescription of a time is to define a period on the expiration of which an act may be done, and not in cases where the immediate purpose is to define a period within which an act must be done. In the former class of case the prescribed number of days must elapse between two acts or events. In the latter class of case the act must (unless a contrary intention appears) be done before the expiration of the last of the prescribed number of days (see, e.g. Radcliffe v. Bartholomew (1892) 1 QB 161 and Armstrong v. Great Southern Gold Mining Co. (1911) 12 CLR 382). END QUOTE Project Blue Sky v Australian Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28 (28 April 1998) QUOTE Dawson J pointed out in Hunter Resources Ltd v Melville when discussing the statutory provision in that case: "substantial compliance with the relevant statutory requirement was not possible. Either there was compliance or there was not." END QUOTE QUOTE 110916 Sheriffs Office notice -Dear Sir/Madam 6-10-2011 Page 5 PLEASE OTE: Until our website Http://www.office-of-the-guardian.com has been set up to operate the website Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com will be the alternative website for contact details. help@office-of-the-guardian.com FREE downloading of documents from http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
OUTSTA DI G WARRA T $297.70 WARRA T TYPE: Infringement Warrant Against a atural Person The Sheriff's Office records indicate that you have an unpaid Warrant. If you do not finalise this matter immediately, the Sheriff may seize and sell your property or if insufficient property is available to satisfy the value of the warrant, you may be imprisoned, after having appeared before a Magistrate. You may finalise this matter by selecting one of the payment options referred to below. This letter is an advice and does not cease any enforcement action by the Sheriff's Office if you fail to take immediate action to finalise this warrant. If you require further information or assistance, please contact the Collections Department at Civic Compliance Victoria on 9200 8223, between 8:00am and 9:00pm Monday to Friday, except public holidays. Alternatively, you can visit www.fines.vic.gov.au for further information. Yours faithfully The Sheriff END QUOTE 110916 Sheriffs Office notice
.
10
15
20
The Sheriffs Office turn out to be the office of Tenix Solutions!

QUOTE 110925-Mr Robert Clark Attorney-General - COMPLAINT - DETAILS REQUESTED etc
25
30
35
40
Now lets look at the usage of the trademark Civic Compliance Victoria or CCV it is clearly used not just as a trademark but in a manner to deliberately deceive It should be understood that honest hardworking citizens are falsely accused of speeding, etc, and then the Infringement system now used will generally rob them of any JUSTICE because if they elect to fight it through the courts they will loose income and jeopardize their payment of mortgage, etc, and if they do not challenge it then they risk their license and still having to pay out monies they cannot afford. This to me is a tyrannical system that doesnt belong in a democratic society and indeed where police officers themselves successfully challenge Infringement Notices then there is clearly the state) making allegations then it must prove this before an impartial court of law and provide that the accused then can challenge any evidence. In my case I did set out to immediately request details and those have not been forthcoming at all and so prevented me to even make any informed decision if I can or cannot challenge the allegation made against me. It may very well, as occurs at times, that the alleged incident may not at all relate to me and yet no evidence was presented to me that indeed I was involved in the incident as claimed by the Infringement Notice. Not uncommon numberplates turn out to be incorrectly read or other problems turn up that mistakes were made as to the identification of the driver. Indeed, the police themselves have hundreds of cases where they allegedly cannot even identify who were driving police vehicles that were allegedly speeding and so if they cannot even identify their own drivers, despite that police vehicles are issued against a certain person who has to sign for it. Then how can they do better with dealing with a member of the general public I may very well ask?
QUOTE 24. Review by enforcement agency
45
(1) If an enforcement agency receives an application for review under section 22, the enforcement agency must (a) review the decision to serve an infringement notice on the person; and (b) suspend any procedures that are being used for the enforcement of the infringement penalty in respect of the infringement offence until (i) the review is complete; and (ii) the applicant is sent advice of the outcome. (2) An enforcement agency must ensure that a review under this section is conducted by a person who was not involved in making the decision to serve the infringement notice which is the subject of the review. 6-10-2011 Page 6 PLEASE OTE: Until our website Http://www.office-of-the-guardian.com has been set up to operate the website Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com will be the alternative website for contact details. help@office-of-the-guardian.com FREE downloading of documents from http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati
50
(3) An enforcement agency must review a decision and advise the applicant of the outcome of the review (a) within the prescribed time; or
(b) if an enforcement agency requests additional information under section 23, within the period of the time prescribed for the purposes of paragraph (a) plus 21 days, whether or not the additional information was received by the agency. (4) If an enforcement agency fails to comply with sub-section (3), the infringement notice is deemed to be withdrawn.
10
(5) Nothing in this section limits the power of an enforcement agency to review a decision to serve an infringement notice on any other basis. END QUOTE
.
15
20
As I indicated in previous correspondence to the Premier Ted Baillieu and copies of the same were forwarded to Civil Compliance Victoria, the police and the Magistrates Court of Victoria that while I had a review on foot the Police simply ignored this and notified me that I had 1 demerit point against my licence regarding the issue in dispute. As such besides that I have challenged the validity of the purported Infringement Act 2006 the police themselves proved they cannot care less and do not give a cahoot as to what may be required or not as their notification of the 1 Demerit point regarding the alleged speeding was dated 19 July 2011 while the decline of the review was dated 27 July 2011:
QUOTE Your application for revocation has been refused, as the Infringements Registrar is not satisfied that there are sufficient "rounds to revoke/cancel the order. The amount of $243.90 must be paid to this office by 7 Sep 11 or a warrant may be issued. If you do not agree with the Infringements Registrar's decision in this matter, you may elect to object and have your Application for Revocation heard by a Magistrate in open court. You will be required to attend the hearing. If you wish to object, you must do so in writing. Your written objection, quoting the Infringements Court Case Number, must be received by the Infringements Registrar within 42 days of the date of this letter. The Infringements Registrar does not have the power to reconsider your application as this can only be done by a Magistrate in open court. END QUOTE
.
25
30
35
Now let us count 42 days, considering that the 27 July date is not to be counted as a day is counted from midnight of the day the order was made till the next day midnight and so on. Therefore we will achieve that day 43 being on 8 September 2011 is the date when the 42 days have expired. 27 July 2011 - day 0 28 July 2001 - day 1 29 July 2001 - day 2 30 July 2001 - day 3 31 July 2001 - day 4 1 August 2001 - day 5 2 August 2001 - day 6 3 August 2001 - day 7 4 August 2001 - day 8 5 August 2001 - day 9 6 August 2001 - day 10 7 August 2001 day11 8 August 2001 day12 9 August 2001 day13 10 August 2001 day14
.
40
45
50
55
11 August 2001 day 12 August 2001 day 13 August 2001 day 14 August 2001 day 15 August 2001 day 16 August 2001 day 17 August 2001 day 18 August 2001 day 19 August 2001 day 20 August 2001 day 21 August 2001 day 22 August 2001 day 23 August 2001 day 24 August 2001 day 25 August 2001 day
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
26 August 2001 day 30 27 August 2001 day 31 28 August 2001 day 32 29 August 2001 day 33 30 August 2001 day 34 31 August 2001 day 35 1 September 2001 day 2 September 2001 day 3 September 2001 day 4 September 2001 day 5 September 2001 day 6 September 2001 day 7 September 2001 day 8 September 2001 day
36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
In regard of this 27 July 2011 Infringement Notice Order I have records (and also acknowledge of document by Civil Compliance Victoria and so it cannot be claimed the documents were not received) of the following document having been forwarded regarding the Infringement matter: 5
.
110810-Magistrates Court of Victoria - o 1158210495 110828-Magistrates Court of Victoria - o 1158210495
10
110830-Magistrates Court of Victoria - o 1158210495-etc (21 pages) (Including ADDRESS TO THE COURT COMPLAI T - ETC) 110906-Ted Baillieu Premier - o 1158210495-etc
15
Therefore it must be clear that the legal processes should have been for the Magistrates Court of Victoria first to address the issue if it could invoke jurisdiction or not. Below a email confirmation from the Magistrates Court of Victoria proving it had received the document then referred to.
QUOTE
20
Re: see attachment 110828-Magistrates Court of Victoria -No 1158210495

1 recipients CC: recipientsYou More FROM:
25
help@magistratescourt.vic.gov.au TO: Mr Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka Monday, 29 August 2011 10:15 AM
Message Body
30
Dear Mr Schorel-Hlavka Thank you for your email.
35
Your email has been forwarded to the Chief Magistrate. Many thanks help@magistratescourt.vic.gov.au
"Mr Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka" <inspector_rikati@yahoo.com.au> 28/08/2011 01:24 Please respond to "Mr Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka" <inspector_rikati@yahoo.com.au>
To "help@magistratescourt.vic.gov.au" <help@magistratescourt.vic.gov.au> cc "Gerrit H." <inspector_rikati@yahoo.com.au>, "heidelberg.uni@police.vic.gov.au" <heidelberg.uni@police.vic.gov.au>, "traffic_inquiries@tenixsolutions.com" <traffic_inquiries@tenixsolutions.com>, "ted.baillieu@parliament.vic.gov.au" <ted.baillieu@parliament.vic.gov.au> Subject see attachment 110828-Magistrates Court of Victoria -No 1158210495
40
E D QUOTE
Just in case there is a question as to if Civil Compliance Victoria was included I will quote a part of a correspondence: 5
QUOTE 110828 CORRESPONDENCE
10
WITHOUT PREJUDICE Mr Grey Chief Magistrate, Magistrates Court of Victoria 2011 Ground Floor, 277 William Street Melbourne Vic 3000
C/o help@magistratescourt.vic.gov.au Cc: Acting Chief Commissioner of the Victorian Police C/o heidelberg.uni@police.vic.gov.au C/o Victoria Police Centre, G.P.O Box 913, Melbourne, VIC, 3001, AUSTRALIA
30-8-
15
Civic Compliance Victoria GPO Box 1916, Melbourne VIC 3001 Traffic_Inquiries@tenixsolutions.com Ted Baillieu Premier of Victoria ted.baillieu@parliament.vic.gov.au Infringement Notice Number 0201683566
20
Ref: Infringement Court case umber 1158210495
ADDRESS TO THE COURT COMPLAI T - ETC Sir, 25

END QUOTE 110828 CORRESPONDENCE
.
Do notice: 30
QUOTE * Civic Compliance Victoria GPO Box 1916, Melbourne VIC 3001 Traffic_Inquiries@tenixsolutions.com END QUOTE
QUOTE 110530 confirmation received email From: TS TRAFFIC Inquiries <Traffic_Inquiries@tenixsolutions.com> [ add to contacts ] To: mayJUSTICEalwaysPREVAIL@schorel-hlavka.com Cc: Date: Monday, May 30, 2011 11:23 pm Subject: RE: Your Infringement notice request Attachments: Text version of this message. (1KB) Dear Sir/Madam,
35
40
45
Thank you for your email regarding an infringement notice. If you are appealing an infringement notice or seeking an extension of time, please ensure that you have provided either the infringement number and/or vehicle registration number and a postal address for prompt reply. Please note that your correspondence cannot be assessed without provision of these details, as the response can only be mailed to your postal address.
50
55
If you have any enquiries, please do not hesitate to contact this office on 03 9200 8206. Yours faithfully,
60
Tenix Solutions Parking Services Disclaimer: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other
65
than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer. For a copy of our privacy policy please visit our website or contact us.
E D QUOTE 110530 confirmation received email

.
10
15
20
This is just one of the many emails received but even if they had not received my emails with attachments then as they were also forwarded to the Police then the Police had the onus to pas on the content to the Infringement Registrar to ensure that any decision that was to be made was upon all relevant details and not just a deliberate concealment of details that the police didnt want the Infringement Registrar to know about. Again the purported Infringement Act 2006 doesnt provide in that regard any protection for an accused and so police can scheme and conceal relevant details time and time again to ensure to score conviction, and this is called JUSTICE? Come on only a moron would consider this concealment to be JUSTICE in progress. Those who take offence to my strong expressions the general public and so to give a misleading/deceptive impression they are dealing with the State of Victoria, a government entity, well it is supposed to be so and not some registered corporation, and I view that therefore the usage of the trademark is for unlawful purposes. I have below quoted the webs address and the content of the web page that gives certain information and I will rely upon this. I was provided with the web address having made known to others that I seek information regarding Infringement Issues, etc.
QUOTE WEBSITE http://exfacie.com/?q=civic_compliance_victoria_explained
the Trade Marks must appear with the symbol (or, if the Trade Mark is not yet registered, the
25
symbol); and
END QUOTE
QUOTE WEBSITE http://exfacie.com/?q=civic_compliance_victoria_explained
(ii) the Trade Mark must be accompanied by the following footnote: The [insert trade mark] trade
30
mark is used by [insert Contractor's details] under licence from the Crown in Right of the State of Victoria.
END QUOTE
35
None of the documentation that I received was I having any or TM markings on it. I found that for example documents refer to Civic Compliance Victoria at no time did I notice any reference to or TM and as such it appears to me to be used as a tradename and not a trademark.
.
40
45
Further, none of the references Civic Compliance Victoria or CCV therefore not only doesnt indicate a trademark or pendinig trademark but neither has the disclosure of under licence from the Crown in Right of the State of Victoria therefore in my view the purported trademark is not signifying to be a trademark or a trademark pending approval and must therefore be seen not to constitute a trademark. On that basis where neither there is any disclosure of under licence from the Crown in Right of the State of Victoria then it neither can be held that Civic compliance Victoria is operating as a State government entiuty nor can operate for any state government entity.
.
Therefore the usage of the wording Civic Compliance Victoria (To which I referred in the past generally as Civil Compliance Victoria) is a deliberate deceptive conduct and as I indicated in for example my correspondence 110923-Paul Stefaniw LSen Con-Infringement issues- o 1158210495-etcthe police are in fact perverting the course of JUSTICE by cooperating with this elaborate deception, etc.
.
10
15
what we now have is that a non registered trademark (as it is not used as a trademark as clearly the mark is not shown and the usage of a non-registered business name nevertheless has been deceptively used in even court documents and yet no one bothered to stop this despite my previous correspondence to purported Mr Law & Order Mr Ted Baillieu Premier, when he \was canvassing the election that he pursued Law & Order. Now can you educate him and so everyone else that Law & Order doesnt translates in to government sponsored terrorism upon the people for some private company to use a purported trademark and then deceive citizens to pay monies into a non registered company Civic Compliance Victoria!
.
20
the fact that Tenix solutions nevertheless issued documents that purport to be under the trademark Civic Compliance Victoria and issuing court orders, warrants, correspondences under the Sheriffs Office trademark, etc, to me is a very serious matter.
.
It must be clear that this appears to be a comprehensive elaborate swindle upon all persons subjected to this kind of conduct.
.
25
In my view all and any monies ever paid to Civic Compliance Victoria by any person must be refunded because it is a non-existing trading business and a non existing trademark., in that the marking is omitted.
END QUOTE110925-Mr Robert Clark Attorney-General - COMPLAINT - DETAILS REQUESTED - etc QUOTE 111001-Mr Robert Clark Attorney-General - COMPLAINT - DETAILS REQUESTED - etcSUPPLEMENT
30
I have also concerns such as to the statement:

QUOTE (2)If the court is satisfied
35
(a) that the person has held an appropriate licence (whether issued in Victoria or in another State or Territory) or an International Driving Permit at some time before the commission of an offence against subsection (1); and (b) that the licence was not cancelled for an offence relating to the driving of a motor vehicle committed by the person in Victoria or in another State or Territory
40
END QUOTE
.
that person is liable to a penalty not exceeding 10 penalty units or to imprisonment for not more than one month.
45
50
Within the Federal constitution by which within s106 the states are created out of the former colonies, the states have their own sovereign powers within its territory (State borders) other then where the Commonwealth has exclusive sovereign powers over any part of territory that is within the State borders. As such army camps are under sovereign powers of the Commonwealth and State police have no enforcement powers within sovereign Commonwealth territories. The State police and other State authorities can have enforcement powers within a territory held by the Commonwealth as a proprietor but not as a sovereign. Where the Commonwealth holds property as a proprietor then state legislative powers can only be enforced for so far it doesnt infringement upon the commonwealth powers for which purpose it uses the property. As such, Commonwealth powers for having a post office can only be used for Commonwealth purposes and any non-exclusive post office purposes would not be protected by the Commonwealth.
For example a Commonwealth army camp leasing out a tennis area and/or golf course to private clubs would be outside the Commonwealth designated purposes. As the Framers of the Constitution made clear where a State has limited legislative powers within its borders then it can with the State who it is desired to have a joint legislative power, such as the river Murray bordering between NSW and Victoria, to refer legislative powers as to the river to the commonwealth so it can then legislate in regard of the river binding both States.
.
10
15
As a CO STITUTIO ALIST I hold it essential that we remain within the ambit of the constitution! This means that id the states desire to have a federal arrangement across borders as to alleged traffic violations then its only course of action is and can be to pursue a State referendum within each relevant State and then if approved by the electors of each State to refer the matter to the Commonwealth for it to determine if it accepts or reject such reference of power and what, if any, financial contribution each State participating in this reference of power were to contribute for the Commonwealth to administer this scheme albeit it cannot be a transfer of legislative powers by all States because then it requires a federal referendum within s128 of the constitution The moment the Commonwealth commences to legislate then that is the end of the States to legislate in regard of this and the States cannot withdraw this reference of powers either. I will not quote the numerous statements in that regard as I have published them time and time again as Author in my books in the I SPECTOR-RIKATI series on certain constitutional and other legal issues. Therefore in my view as a CO STITUTIO ALIST the states cannot apply any demerit points or other kind of punishment from one State in another. I may add that the Commonwealth Powers (Children) Act 1986 is a clear example how little politicians and in particular the lawyers in parliament really understand about the meaning and application of the constitution because those purported acts pretends that a governor can withdraw the reference of powers which the Framers of the Constitution made clear that once subjected to Caesar then always subjected to Caesar. Meaning we have a lot of lawyers of which known seem to understand what is really applicable. Hence that is why I am not brainwashed not being a lawyer!
.
20
25
30
QUOTE
35
19A
Direction not to renew licence (1) Despite section 19(4), if directed by the sheriff under section 114 of the Infringements Act 2006, the Corporation must not renew a driver licence or permit of a person in respect of whom that direction applies until notified by the sheriff that the non-renewal direction has ceased because one of the matters referred to in section 115 of that Act has occurred.
40
(2) When sending a notice of renewal of a driver licence or permit in accordance with this Act to a licence or permit holder in respect of whom a direction has been given under section 114 of the Infringements Act 2006, the Corporation must include in the notice of renewal a notice advising that renewal will not be granted until one of the matters referred to in section 115 of that Act occurs because of a direction of the sheriff under section 114 of that Act. 19B Renewal of licence or permit The Corporation may renew a driver licence or permit which was not renewed by virtue of section 19A when the Corporation receives notification from the sheriff in accordance with section 115 of the Infringements Act 2006.
45
50
END QUOTE
.
As I already did refer to the purpose of a driver license then clearly s19A in blatant breach of it and I view is therefore null and void. Plainly stated stop stuffing about with peoples livelihood, in particularly professional drivers and not have a government terrorism put upon professional drivers in particular.
What drivers do in one state within those State conditions may be totally different then in another State and as such you cannot enforce provisions that may be unlawful in one State but lawful another State.
.
A person who might be licensed at age 16 in one State may not be able to obtain a license at that age in another state and surely this also shows the absurdity to enforce State provisions of one State in another State?
.
10
Road Safety Act 1986 QUOTE 84BIOffence to provide false or misleading information A person must not in a statement given under section 84BE(1) or 84BF(1)(a) to an enforcement official provide information that the person knows to be false or misleading.
15
END QUOTE
Penalty:
60 penalty units. __________________
Crimes Act 1958 20

QUOTE 83AFalsification of documents (1) A person must not make a false document with the intention that he or she, or another person, shall use it to induce another person to accept it as genuine, and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to that other person's, or to another person's prejudice. Penalty: Level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum).
25
(2) A person must not use a document which is, and which he or she knows to be, false, with the intention of inducing another person to accept it as genuine, and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to that other person's, or to another person's prejudice.
30
Penalty:
Level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum).
(3) A person must not make a copy of a document which is, and which he or she knows to be, a false document, with the intention that he or she, or another person, shall use it to induce another person to accept it as a copy of a genuine document and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to that other person's, or to another person's prejudice.
35
Penalty:
(4) A person must not use a copy of a document which is, and which he or she knows to be, a false document, with the intention of inducing another person to accept it as a copy of a genuine document and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to that other person's, or to another person's prejudice.
40
Penalty:
(5) A person must not have in his or her custody, or under his or her control, a document which is, and which he or she knows to be, false, with the intention that the person or another shall use it to induce another person to accept it as genuine, and by reason of so accepting it to do or not to do some act to that other person's, or to another person's, prejudice.
45
END QUOTE
.
Penalty:
50
Now this is more to my liking because all those people involved in pretending there is such a creature as the Civic Compliance Victoria as a entity when all it is shown to be is a trademark owned by the State of Victoria then surely are involved in an elaborate conspiracy. Getting back to the police officers correspondence of 20 March 2011 it stated
QUOTE 6-10-2011 Page 13 PLEASE OTE: Until our website Http://www.office-of-the-guardian.com has been set up to operate the website Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com will be the alternative website for contact details. help@office-of-the-guardian.com FREE downloading of documents from http://www.scribd.com/InspectorRikati
Send correspondence relating to this Notice to: Civic compliance Victoria, GPO BOX 1916, MELBOURNE VIC 3001 END QUOTE
.
Clearly there is nothing in this to show that Civic compliance Victoria is a mere trademark and not a business entity or a government department enforcing government matters and neither that it is a judiciary entity issuing warrants/court orders. The same correspondence also stated:
QUOTE For further information regarding Victorian Traffic Infringements please visit www.fines.vic.gov.au or contact Civic Compliance Victoria on (03) 9200 8111 or in person at Ground Floor, 277 William Street Melbourne. END QUOTE
.
10
15
As set out in my 25 September 2011 correspondence this address at 277 William Street Melbourne actually is having a sign Civic compliance Victoria but turns out to be a private business under the name Tenix Solutions.
.
20
25
What we have is that while the government must operate as agents for the People (citizens) in fact it has set itself up as a terrorist organization to use blackmail and extortion and other conduct to extort from people monies not as agents to act for them but as some private corporation that is well willing to use terrorism upon anyone as long as it brings in monies for the government in its never ending splurging monies and perks, etc. . THIS HAS TO STOP!
END QUOTE 111001-Mr Robert Clark Attorney-General - COMPLAINT - DETAILS REQUESTED - etcSUPPLEMENT
30
QUOTE 111001-Mr Robert Clark Attorney-General - COMPLAINT - DETAILS REQUESTED - etcSUPPLEMENT
35
You cannot have that the Police and other so called enforcement agencies can manipulate the system under falsehood destroying peoples lives, livelihood, etc, and then are allowed to get away with this. There are ample of people who lost a loved one because of this who would like to string up those deviants who perpetrated this evil upon them.
.
Road Safety Act 1986

QUOTE S67(6)
40
(d)is offered a payment plan in accordance with the Infringements Act 2006 and the enforcement agency under that Act or the Secretary (as the case may be) receives the first payment under that plan from the person; or END QUOTE
45
Infringement Act 2006

QUOTE "driver licence" has the same meaning as it has in section 3 of the Road Safety Act 1986 and includes a learner permit under Part 3 of that Act; "enforcement agency", in relation to an infringement offence, means
50
(a) a person or body authorised by or under an Act to take proceedings for the infringement offence in respect of which the infringement notice or official warning was issued or served; or (b) a person by whom, or body by which, a person or body referred to in paragraph (a) is employed or engaged to provide services if the taking of the proceedings referred to in that paragraph would occur in the course of that employment or in the course of providing those services; or
55
(c) a prescribed person or body or person or body which is a member of a prescribed class of person or body; END QUOTE
.
How on earth can you have a driver license obtained for the purpose and upon conditions to control a certain class of motor vehicles then be changed as to its conditions as time goes on whatever some other State may fancy to do? Surely no one can be expected to be compelled to now research every State legislation not even Gazetted in the state of Victoria?
.
10
This is what the federation is about that any federal provisions is Gazetted also in Victoria which a other sovereign State has no need for. Therefore legislative provisions of another state cannot be enforced against a Victorian citizens.
.
15
Hansard 2-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: The practice in England has been that when the House of Commons is dissolved, the Gazette which contains the proclamation, or one issued concurrently, also contains a proclamation summoning a parliament to meet on a given day, and all the writs are appointed to be returned on that day.
20
END QUOTE
.
25
A person who owns a motor vehicle but it is used by another person and without the knowledge of the motor vehicle owner the vehicle is then used inter state then it is not only absurd but insane to expect the mot0or vehicle owner to be aware of laws that applies in another state that were never proclaimed in the State of Victoria.
.
30
Without proclamation within the State of Victoria no legislation can be enforced. The right of citizens is to know what laws are being enacted and are applicable and fancy that one allow some one to borrow a suitcase made of alligator skin and then it is taken into a country where the skin of alligators is prohibited to be used and then the owner of the suitcase is then fined because of this. Lets be clear about it only State legislative provisions within the context of the federal constitution can be enforced and not that of another State.
.
35
And getting back to our so to say pet project Civic Compliance Victoria we then have to look at how can a trademark be deemed to be some identity? As in my previous correspondence I reproduced documentation referring to Civic Compliance Victoria
. The second and fourth boxes at the bottom refers to Civic Compliance Victoria
The bottom part reproduces shows also a reference to Civic Compliance Victoria:
Obviously I like to know who signed this document as Infringement Registrar because I view you cannot tolerate a Court to use a fictitious business name which also refers to Civic Compliance Victoria, so that person can also be held legally accountable within the provisions of the Crimes Act 1958!
10
15
Then lets go one step further and check out to who belongs the Bpay number 49031 referred to on the documentations
And if we take a closer look at the bank details provided who is the holder of this number we find it automatically provides the name Civic Compliance Victoria.
10
It must therefore be very clear regardless if it is the Police, the Sheriffs Office, the Infringement court/Magistrates Court of Victoria , Tenix Solutions they all are using the same trademark reference! ow for this we must then explore what kind of business it is and under what business names it is associated with and what AB number it is using;
.
15
Infringement Act 2006

QUOTE "enforcement agency", in relation to an infringement offence, means
(a) a person or body authorised by or under an Act to take proceedings for the infringement offence in respect of which the infringement notice or official warning was issued or served; or (b)
a person by whom, or body by which, a person or body referred to in paragraph (a) is employed or engaged to provide services if the taking of the proceedings referred to in that paragraph would occur in the course of that employment or in the course of providing those services; or
(c) a prescribed person or body or person or body which is a member of a prescribed class of person or body;
10
END QUOTE
.
15
20
Now what we have first of all is that an enforcement agency therefore can the the police officer, well you and me if we are authorised to do so. The constitutional question remains how on earth can a enforcement agency then be both the enforcer as to issuing Infringement Notices, and issuing Infringement Notice Orders and warrants and deal with review or Infringement Orders Notices one may ask. It also means that a person who is issued with an Infringement Notice really doesnt have a clue which person or entity he is or can deal with because there is no proper control upon it. Hence Civic Compliance Victoria claiming to have no computer records of my past correspondences, even so I have evidence they acknowledged to receive it time and time again, and clearly this is a kind of total disorganisation that should never be permitted to be in existence but more then likely was deliberately engineered to be so by the government to ensure that people may just give up and pay the darn Infringement Notice extortion then to try to work out who really is in charge.
.
25
Obviously it is also essential that for purpose of criminal conduct we discover where the liability lies.
.
Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act
30
QUOTE 115 States not to coin money A State shall not coin money, nor make anything but gold and silver coin a legal tender in payment of debts. END QUOTE
.
35
40
Now here we have a State trademark being used to pursue me to be in breach of the constitution to pay using Bpay or otherwise monies in currency? Well really what is going on when the law enforcement agencies such as the Police and the Sheriffs Office are threatening me with wheelclamping, etc, because I refuse to act contrary to the provisions of s115 in that regard also What kind of leadership do we really have when we have a Premier elected upon the platform of Law & Order and as I view it is having a government sponsored terrorism as a modus operandi rather then to represent the people as their agent?
45
QUOTE 111001-Mr Robert Clark Attorney-General - COMPLAINT - DETAILS REQUESTED - etcSUPPLEMENT
50
55
As I understand it Civic Compliance Victoria is handling hundreds millions of dollars or more like billions of dollars and no record that it is part of the Department of Justice even so I understand Tenix Solutions is using the ABN 32 790 228 959 belonging to the Department of Justice when asked about the ABN number of Civic Compliance Victoria. Basically we have is this gigantic black hole where a lot of money goes in and unaccounted for and one has to ask why didnt the Auditor-General pick this up and deal with it? Why indeed can the Police and Sheriffs Office terrorise citizens and extort monies to be paid to a non-existing entity Civic Compliance Victoria? Crimes Act 1958
QUOTE 28 Extortion with threat to destroy property etc. A person who makes a demand of another person with a threat to destroy, or endanger the safety of, a building, structure in the nature of a building, bridge, mine, aircraft, vessel, motor vehicle, railway engine or railway carriage is guilty of an indictable offence. Penalty: END QUOTE
.
10
QUOTE Sorell v Smith (1925) Lord Dunedin in the House of Lords In an action against a set person in combination, a conspiracy to injure, followed by actual injury, will give good cause for action, and motive or instant where the act itself is not illegal is of the essence of the conspiracy. E D QUOTE
15
20
It ought to be clear that what the wheel clamping is to achieve is that the owner of the motor vehicle gives in and for example pays unconstitutionally/unlawfully into a Civic Compliance Victoria account or otherwise hand over monies in blatant disregard of the persons constitutional rights. This to me is very serious and little wonder why so many people resort to violence, riots, etc, when those who ought to protect the people are so to say becoming the scum of the earth to terrorise and otherwise abuse and misuse their powers blatantly disregarding the rights of citizens. As this correspondence commenced:
.
25
30
Even today the media reported about the fact how identity theft is used and even people murdered after their identity was stolen. A Prosecutor made known he successfully had murderers convicted after they had murdered the person of whom they had stolen their identity. It was also made clear that many lawyers were working for those who were acting as debt collection agencies but in fact had no legal right to do so but the lawyers themselves simply were unaware of this. As such, it exposed the lack of proper and thoughtful attention of lawyers who then for the body debt collectors would take action against innocent people.
.
35
The Commonwealth itself has repeatedly pointed out that the 100 points required for establishing bank accounts is to fight terrorism. There is also a criminal element in obtaining persons medical record as to be used then to obtain certain drugs to be sold to others.
.
40
45
50
It must be clear that there are many rackets going on and with all the security or purported security systems put in place nevertheless identity theft is on the rise. We have that a business like Tenix Solutions operating unde the guise of CIVIC COMPLIA CE VICTORIA has freely access to Victorian Government databases and can not only obtain confidential details of drivers who may have offended but in fact obtain confidential details of people they may assume have offended and then have them subjected to a terrorism of demands, etc, regardless of how innocent their victims might be, because of the way the Victorian Government has set it all up. By this it is open access for anyone really to commit identity theft as while the Commonwealth has a privacy laws in place that generally is used against ordinary people not being able to obtain details from a government department in reality it is circumvented when it comes to big business like Tenix Solutions.
.
With even the magistrates Court of victoria issuing orders referring to the unregistered entity CIVIC COMPLIA CE VICTORIA then one has to ask what on earth is going on with the commonwealths national security provisions? After all tirents and dictatorships all are generally having their secret bank accounts to stash the loot they pilfered from citizens and I view the
10
15
20
COMPLIA CE VICTORIA account may b\be just the tip of the iceberg of schemes in which monies might be diverted without any controls in place. . The commonwealth cannot maintain a vigilance as to its 100 point system where the State of Victoria had ignored proper compliance to it. Neither can the Commonwealth insist in proper usage of a trademark where it, the courts, the police, the Sheriff Office and others all are using the trademark as if it is a legitimate business entity whereas it is nothing more but a trademark. Surely when even the courts are referring to it as if it is a legitimate business entity then one ought to accept that citizens are swindled big time and if one cannot trust the Courts then who can we? . I may state that despite my elaborate complaints to Robert Clark Attorney-General for the State of Victoria, with copies forwarded to even the Premier of Victoria Ted Baillieu, Grey the Chief magistrate of the Magistrates Court of Victoria, the Police and others nothing was done so far to what I am aware of to stop this elaborate rot. Therefore the generally consensus by those offending against the RULE OF LAW appears to me to be; why bother to act lawfully while we can ignore to act lawfully! And for this the Commonwealth must act swiftly and confiscate all and any monies paid into the CIVIC COMPLIA CE VICTORIA account subject to a impartial investigation as to the matters complained about in this correspondence and any related matters and it will reject any overtures by the Victorian Attorney-General (or any other Attorney-General) to have warrants used to suspend the legal rights and entitlements of those who rely upon a pension or other welfare payment. This kind of extortion and terrorism must never be permitted to be operative within the Commonwealth of Australia!
CIVIC
25
30
35
40
In my view the material clearly exposes the misuse and abuse of the trademark CIVIC COMPLIA CE VICTORIA not just by Tenix Solutions but also by various government Department and in the process undermines public confidence in the Commonwealths trademark provisions. Also, as shown above the extortion to demand monies without the matter ever having been in an open court for adjudication and using the CIVIC COMPLIA CE VICTORIA trademark for this also ought to be horrifying for any fair dinkum Australian. Also any notion of suspending pensions/welfare payments clearly would be beyond the Commonwealths powers in particular where this is an internal State matter and would only serve to enhance public dissatisfaction, and people so denied their financial entitlements may then turn to a life of crime to otherwise find financial resources. Obviously the bank account(s) of a trademark CIVIC COMPLIA CE VICTORIA misuse should be cancelled/suspended as to facilitate this kind of bank account could be used by other organizations also to use a trademark for outlawed organizations. I view bank accounts should only be permitted to be established in registered business where it relates to business transactions as to fight corruption also. This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to refer to all details//issues. .
MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL

45 . (
Our name is our motto!)
50
Awaiting your response,
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka (Gerrit)

111006-Julia Gillard MP - Misuse of Trademark - WARRANT - Suspension of Pension - Etc

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

111006-Julia Gillard MP - Misuse of Trademark - WARRANT - Suspension of Pension - Etc

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

5

Julia Gillard PM C/o "R.McClelland.MP@aph.gov.au" <R.McClelland.MP@aph.gov.au> Cc:

Tony Abbott Tony.Abbott.MP@aph.gov.au

Robert CmcClelland Attorney-General R.McClelland.MP@aph.gov.au Mr Robert Clark MP Attorney-General robert.clark@parliament.vic.gov.au

Ted Baillieu Premier of Victoria

COMPLAI TS (misuse of Trademark Bank account - Warrants Pensions etc)

HA SARD 27-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE

Infringement Act 2006 (Vic)

QUOTE 27 Junly 2011

The Sheriffs Office turn out to be the office of Tenix Solutions!

110810-Magistrates Court of Victoria - o 1158210495 110828-Magistrates Court of Victoria - o 1158210495

Re: see attachment 110828-Magistrates Court of Victoria -No 1158210495

help@magistratescourt.vic.gov.au TO: Mr Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka Monday, 29 August 2011 10:15 AM

Ref: Infringement Court case umber 1158210495

ADDRESS TO THE COURT COMPLAI T - ETC Sir, 25

E D QUOTE 110530 confirmation received email

I have also concerns such as to the statement:

60 penalty units. __________________

Crimes Act 1958 20

Level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum).

Level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum).

Level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum).

Level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum).

QUOTE 111001-Mr Robert Clark Attorney-General - COMPLAINT - DETAILS REQUESTED - etcSUPPLEMENT

Road Safety Act 1986

Infringement Act 2006

Infringement Act 2006

Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act

QUOTE 111001-Mr Robert Clark Attorney-General - COMPLAINT - DETAILS REQUESTED - etcSUPPLEMENT

Level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum).

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL

Our name is our motto!)

Awaiting your response,

Вам также может понравиться