• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • 3
    CommentGo Back
 
1
Form 55A Notice of Appeal
(Order 53, rule 2, Order 53B, rule 2 and Order 59, rule1)
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIANo. VID91 of 2009VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRYOn appeal from the ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNALBETWEENPHAM
©® (artificial person)
pham (natural man god creation) deny consent to be enslavedApplicantsandSECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT ANDWORKPLACE RELATIONS RespondentNOTICE OF APPEAL (Amended Thursday, 26 February 2009)1. TAKE NOTICE that the applicant appeals from the decision ordetermination of (
specify Tribunal below
) given on (
specify date
) at (
specify place
) by which the Tribunal decided or determined (
specify decision or determination appealed from
).
TRIBUNAL: ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL,JOHN HANDLEY, SENIOR MEMBERDATE: On 19 JANUARY 2009PLACE: MELBOURNE
PHAM
____________________________________________________________
 
2
2. THE QUESTIONS OF LAW raised on appeal are — (
specify each questionof law
).
a)
 ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL ACT 1975 SECT 2A
 
Tribunal’s objective
In carrying out its functions, the Tribunal mustpursue the objective of providing a mechanism of review that is fair, just, economical, informal and quick. Whether Senior Member of theAdministrative Appeals Tribunal John Handley can conspire to pervert justice under
 Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975
, by fabricatingfacts and evidence, contrary to the
Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth)
S 43: (1),inter alia;
 
b)
 
Whether John Handley can dispense with the rules of evidence, underthe Laws of Natural Justice, and
Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth)
and
CriminalCode Act 1995 (Cth)
;c)
 
Whether Senior Member John Handley did apply S3 of the
 Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975
, requiring a direct review of a decision, under an Enactment;d)
 
Whether John Handley can discriminate based on race under the
 Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth)
and
 Human Rights and EqualOpportunity Commission Act 1986 
 
(Cth)
;e)
 
Whether John Handley can modify the Applicant’s Appeal without hisauthorization, under S2a and 3
 Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975
, inter alia;f)
 
Whether John Handley can refuse to address the Appeals at hand, orfrivolously and vexatiously slander and libel the Applicant and his race,under the AAT Act 1975 or RDA 1975;
 
3
g)
 
Judicial Bias: Handley failed to disqualify himself from proceedingsdue to prior COMCARE matter that’s ongoing to the High Court whereHandley has been named, and failed to heed the HighCourt adviceregarding apprehended bias; then failed to disqualify himself forrefusing to disqualify himself for perverting justice;h)
 
Whether John Handley applied
 Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 
S3(4) Without prejudice to any other method available by law for theproof of decisions or orders of the Tribunal, a document purporting tobe a copy of such a decision or order, and to be certified by theRegistrar, a District Registrar or a Deputy Registrar to be a true copy of the decision or order, is, in any proceeding,
 prima facie
evidence of thedecision or order; no documents have been certified;i)
 
Whether S 13 and 15F
Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth)
comes into effect thatany person may commence a prosecution, against individuals fordeliberate and with malice breaches of 
Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth)
S 43:(1); j)
 
Whether John Handley applied
 Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 
S3by refusing to allow the Applicant the opportunity to reply to theRespondents final submissions;k)
 
Whether John Handley applied
 Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 
S3by refusing to list in his judgment:http://kangaroocourtaustralia.com l)
 
Deprivation of rights under color of law. What was the due process of law
m)
 
 Evidence Act 1995 (Cth)n)
 
Privacy Act 1988 (Cth)
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
unclemashem

Pfff What a waist of time as it is was impossible for the high courts to have been lawfully created by a parliament which was is not in subjucation to the constitution. (a constitutional requirement)Further to that the high courts came into being 10 days after the dissalution of an unelected parliament. Further to that, regarding the nessary seperation of powers that would have made Barton and O"Connor both PM and high court judges at the same same time snd worse still self appointed.The position of PM is all the proof one needs to show that The Australian parliament has never been lawful.Another interesting fact is that Barton blackmailed the Govenor general for the commissioning of the position of PM by threatening to keep victoria out of the commonwealth if he was not appointed PM. Leading to the decommisioning of Lyne, his first selection for the unconstitutional position of Prime minister.The word treason comes to mind.

reply06 / 25 / 2009
Judicial Corruption Australia

Might still be under British rule ^^ dont forget The Rt Hon Mrs Helen Liddell British High Commish Quote FAX COVER SHEET: pages 20 pham RE: Form 1 Notice of a Constitutional Matter VID 91/2009 FOR THE ATTENTION OF: The Rt Hon Mrs Helen Liddell British High Commission, Canberra, Australia Commonwealth Avenue Yarralumla ACT 2600 Canberra Telephone: (+61) (0) 2 6270 6666 Fax: (+61) (0) 2 6273 3236 Consul-General: Mr Stuart Gill (+61) (0) 3 9650 2990 Her Excellency Ms Quentin Bryce AC Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia Government House Dunrossil Drive YARRALUMLA ACT 2600 Tel: (02) 6283 3533 Fax: (02) 6281 3760 Email: governor-general@gg.gov.au

reply02 / 26 / 2009
Judicial Corruption Australia

just want to let you all note that the above documents have been updated. just cut and paste what applies to you regarding race, content etc, leaving the legal arguments

reply02 / 25 / 2009
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...