In earlier proceeding Palmer had responded to attempts by the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation to recover $1.5 million in tax by sending a document entitled ‘Notice to Show Cause’ requiring the judge
‘to show Just Cause with respect to’ (amongst other things): The County Court of Victoria being a court that complies with Chapter III of the Commonwealth Constitution, under the Crown of the United Kingdom. The presiding Judge proving that he/she has sworn an oath to the Queen of the United Kingdom. The County Court Civil Procedure Rules 2008 complying with a Parliamentary Order as per section 87 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth).
and then seeking summary dismissal or striking out of the Deputy Commissioner’s claim, ‘with prejudice, on the grounds that it is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process, and ... is, in its entirety a legal nonsense’, while claiming ‘costs and damages’.
Beach JA states of the preceding trial
The flavour of this hearing can be gleaned from the applicant’s announcement of his appearance to the judge. In response to the judge’s seemingly innocuous statement, ‘And Mr Palmer, you represent yourself’, the applicant said: I’m Michael, and we are that person’s personal representative in private capacity in being. We appear under duress as the beneficiary of that constructive estate to ensure that that estate is not unlawfully damaged. We act as the mind, body, spirit in being and we are here as an inquirer, first and foremost, in respect of jurisdiction.
Palmer was unhappy with the decision, seeking judicial review alongside a declaration that the judge’s orders were 'null and void or, alternatively, quashed' with a 'judicial writ of mandamus’ being used to provide that the 'alleged' debt be 'extinguished/declared null and void and un-enforceable. Palmer identified a mere 36 alleged errors of law by the Judge, including
- ‘failing to establish jurisdiction over a subject of the Crown, separate from the Holy See of Rome, as dictated by the 1688 Bill of Rights’;
- ‘failing to establish jurisdiction over a living, breathing man, a de jure solemn et naturale’;
- ‘failing to establish the source and fountain of justice that flowed through the court that was operating within Australia’s Constitutional Monarchy’;
- ‘stating that the Court was operating under the title of the “King of Australia”, but then ignore[ing] the fact that there was no instrument at law that established that title to be used in relation to Australia and its territories, which extends to the State of Victoria’;
- ‘ignoring the fact that the subject of the Crown clearly stated that he did not agree, or consent, to act as surety for the Defendant entity’; and
- ‘ignoring evidence — by way of the County Court of Victoria Annual Report — that the County Court was a trading corporation operating under a trading name with an ABN, and could not make lawful orders’.
Income tax – Judgment against applicant for in excess of $2m for unpaid income tax – Attempt by applicant to file judicial review proceeding – Proposed judicial review proceeding constituting an abuse of process – Application for leave to appeal from primary judge’s refusal to direct Prothonotary to accept and seal proposed originating motion – Application for leave to appeal having no prospects of success – Pseudo-legal gibberish – Mumbo jumbo – Application for leave to appeal totally without merit – Application for leave to appeal refused.
