In Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited v Evans [2023] NSWSC 1018 - one of many judgments regarding loan recovery of funding of Evans' farm - the NSWSC considered pseudo law identity and jurisdiction claims
[7]At the commencement of the hearing “Tony” announced his appearance, insisting that he not be referred to by the name Anthony Evans. He explained that Anthony Evans was an entity defined in the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth); that he was a man, not an entity; and that he controlled the trust, Anthony William Evans referred to in the various pleadings and motions, and that he did not recognise that name as referring to him.
[8] If he was not Anthony William Evans, Tony, of course, had no right to appear in the proceedings, not being a party to them.
[9] But it emerged that it was Tony who had used the name Anthony William Evans when he swore an affidavit in support of one of the motions filed by Anthony William Evans, before a justice of the peace. In the result I was satisfied that Tony was Anthony William Evans, the name he had used not only when he and Mrs Evans borrowed from the Bank and entered various agreements with it, but also later when filing documents in these proceedings, including the defence, cross-claim and the motions which Tony appeared to advance. ...
[37] Despite his abandonment of the hearing , the case which Tony advanced in the various documents in evidence and his oral submissions have to be considered. They were somewhat difficult to follow, resting as they did on notions such as the location of Norfolk Island, out of which he claimed the Court operates, because “You people moved off shore in 1973”.
[38] The result was claimed to be that it has no jurisdiction to take the land which he claims has been in his family since 1875. At one point he said that it was located in a colony of New South Wales. Later, however, he submitted that it was not in New South Wales, which was a corporate state, which had nothing to do with the land he lived on.
[39] Tony also claimed at the hearing that the matter was a tax matter only, given s 55 of the Constitution; that a tax treaty was the highest law that governed him; that I was “an international servant in the international monetary fund”; and that all the other “nonsense” on which the Bank relied was null and void.
