AVN still fighting in court for child victims of COVID vaccine pushers
From the AVN
AUSTRALIA’S national vaccine-safety watchdog, the Australian Vaccination-risks Network, Inc (AVN), has filed an appeal in the Full Federal Court, seeking to overturn what AVN believes to be an erroneous decision by judge Melissa Perry, in denying both the organisation and their co-applicant, Mr Mark Neugebauer, legal Standing.
Since February of this year, the AVN has been pursuing a judicial review of the Federal Government’s decision to extend the use of these unapproved genetic modification injections to 5-11 year old children.
AVN’s senior counsel and co-counsel are part of an extremely experienced legal team and believe grave errors have been made in the approvals process for 5-11 year olds, leading to the deaths of at least five children and significant injuries to thousands more.
“In addition, we have filed a claim for Mandamus, asking the Court to order the Secretary of the Department of Health, Brendan Murphy, to do his duty to protect the lives and health of the Australian population, and properly consider cancelling or suspending the Covid-19 injectables. These novel gene therapies have proved to be not only completely ineffective but also deadly and dangerous,” AVN staff stated.
The legal team has gathered evidence from some of the most esteemed medical and scientific experts in the world and data comes directly from Australian Government statistics. “We are ready and have been ready for some time to present this devastating information to the court. But the Government’s approach is to avoid at all costs our evidence being laid squarely before the Court, which has led to enormous delay and cost increases,” said AVN founder and legal liaison Meryl Dorey.
“In our original case management hearings, Her Honour acknowledged the urgency of our case. When Novak Djokovic rightly fought against his exclusion from the Australian Open, he was in court within 48 hours. The stakes in our case are far, far higher, and we think the Court will agree.
“Our community has supported this action the entire way both financially and morally. It is their wish that the AVN continues to pursue justice, and their belief that the Full Bench of the Federal Court will finally be the place where Australians can be heard and their grievances addressed.”
The timeline of AVN’s actions at this point in the case are as follows:
June 20: AVN receives the costs decision from Her Honour in respect of the March 23 hearing on standing – AVN’s primary submission was that this case represents matters of serious public interest, and therefore the AVN should not have to pay the legal costs of the Secretary of Health, a government bureaucrat. This submission was rejected resulting in an adverse costs order against the AVN.
June 21:AVN files its appeal with the Federal Court.
June 22: AVN’s appeal is accepted by the court and a sealed copy of the same received.
June 23: AVN submits a letter to the Court requesting an urgent hearing for an appeal.
“While innocent children and adults continue to be misled about the safety, efficacy and necessity of becoming guinea pigs in what Minister Hunt called the world’s largest clinical trial, leading to permanent injuries and deaths, we will continue to fight to protect them,” Ms Dorey concluded.
Lawyer Julian Gillespie addresses the Australian Covid Inquiry
Mr Gillespie is currently leading proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia related to “Australian Vaccination-Risks Network Incorporated v. Secretary, Department of Health.”
COVID UNDER QUESTION is a cross-party inquiry into the Government’s response to COVID held on 23rd March 2022. COVID Under Question was hosted by Senator Malcolm Roberts (One Nation Federal Senator for Queensland) and attended by Stephen Andrew (One Nation Queensland State MP for Mirani), George Christensen (Federal Nationals MP for Dawson), Gerard Rennick (Federal Liberal Senator for Queensland), Alex Antic (Federal Liberal Senator for South Australia) and Craig Kelly (Federal Palmer United Australia MP for Hughes).
Parliamentarians heard from a range of Doctors, experts, economists and everyday people about how the Government’s response to COVID has affected them and at times defied belief. The absurdity of Chief Health Officer dictates and power hungry politicians is all laid bare.
The full day’s proceedings were recorded and are available here: https://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/covid-under-question-a-cross-party-inquiry/
Very enlightening videos.
Culleton exposed corrupt legal system in senate in 2016
Letter to the Editor
The rot started in 1870 when lawyers funded by the Rothschilds weaseled their way back into the Parliament of the United Kingdom House of Commons, and installed the worship of Satan as the State Religion instead of Christianity. The Constitution of the United Kingdom is actually the New Testament and book of Isaiah, and is evidenced as such because the Official King James Version of the Holy Bible has the Royal Seal in the Flyleaf, so what these people are seeking is really freedom of religion, and the return to the Rule of Law lost when lawyers staged their bloodless coup in 1870. The very thing they did in 1873 was make lawyers law into the State Religion enforced by their ilk, as Judges and Magistrates.
The dirtbags in the Registries of the Federal Court of Australia are serial criminals, and this plandemic would be over since Professor Thomas Barody made public the treatment for Covid19 on the first of August 2021. His evidence in the Federal Court of Australia would convict all our present politicians, Prime Minister Morrison. Red Dan, Perrotet, McGowan in Perth, and Annastacia Paluszczuk in Brisbane, strip them of their Parliamentary Pensions, and cashier them to the ranks. This is not pseudo-legal bullshit, but cold hard fact.
We have a Troll. When Rod Culleton exposed the corrupt legal system in the Parliament of the Commonwealth on the 12th September 2016, the legal system set out to get him. Rod has a $2.2 billion damages claim against the Commonwealth, using the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) and its black letter law, and S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty. Tell me madam Troll, are these black and white laws or pseudo-legal bullshit!!!!
If we had a Prime Minister Morrison with at least half a set, he would realise that if the Federal Court of Australia would obey S 42,43 and 44 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) every State in the Commonwealth and the Commonwealth itself would be bankrupted in a week. In 2016 on the very same day that the Senate without enough people in it sent Rod Culleton to the High Court the Federal Court of Australia sat with 36 Judges and made the Federal Court ( Criminal Practice ) Rules 2016 and the papers to indict all thee criminals are in those Rules. Problem!!! The protection racket for politicians will not allow them to be lodged so they have to face a jury. The politicians do not need to be locked up, just pay what they owe for their crimes.
In Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne papers were lodged with the Federal Court of Australia to indict ex- officio under S 13 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) the State of Victoria, State of New South Wales and State of Queensland as if they were common criminal corporations as the Judiciary Act 1903 provides in S 64 and have them pay $1,070,000 a day damages to the prosecutor as provided by S 42 and 43 of the Acts Interpretation Act 1954 (Q) with the rest into Consolidated Revenue. In every case a Judicial Registrar refused to allow them to be filed. This is not legal bullshit, because S 44 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) imposes three years imprisonment for concealing an alleged crime.
John F Kennedy once said that if you have someone by the balls, their heart and mind will follow. Senator Rod Culleton is the only member of the forty fifth Parliament who will not be prevented from running when the Gesara elections are called. Part of Gesara is reform of the legal system back to pre 1871, when the bloodless satanic coup occurred. Yes New Parliament House is a Satanic Temple, the Queen has not kept her promise made at her Coronation, and the nine fake Queens, one for every State are all illegitimate, but when a Judge gets a salary of $450,000 plus perks, is he going to allow anyone to kill his Golden Goose. The word today out of the United States of America is that Gesara-Nesara is real and coming ready or not.
The numbers look great, and here is why they are needed. Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second when Crowned, promised: Will you to the utmost of your power maintaine the laws of God the true profession of the Gospell and the Protestant reformed religion established by law? and will you preserve to the bishops and clergy of this realme and to the churches committed to their charge all such rights and privileges as by law doe or shall appertaine unto them or any of them.
King and Queen
All this I promise to doe.
Because Liz has failed us, we need to get our freedom back, and that freedom is under the Constitution, not as enacted in 1900, but as in place in 1867, in Queensland, with the addition of the Court of Chancery that existed in the United Kingdom until 1873.
The Godless, some of whom openly admit that state, only make up a minority, and the numbers in Canberra today represent the Godly ones, presently being persecuted by the minority in power. Persecution is a Crime against Humanity, as set out in S 268:20 Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) but does not activate until a proscribed inhumane act is done, offending some of the other provisions like murder, or civil conscription offending S 268:12 Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth). Then the penalty is 34 years imprisonment and $2,140,000 a day for a corporation. Political Protests are protected by these laws, so the Police will need to be careful, in their conduct.#
from Peter Gargan
Landmark case fights states’ grab for total power, upholds religious freedom
By TONY MOBILIFONITIS
A BARRISTER representing Glady Berejiklian’s dictatorial COVID-19 regime that forbids singing in churches in the name of fighting a virus has told the Federal Court in Sydney “No one disputes a common law fundamental freedom of the practice of religion”.
This is the regime that recently issued $1000 fines to each of 30 adult members of a Sydney congregation who met during a lockdown. The same regime banned the minister from preaching for seven days, fined the church organisation $5000 for hosting the event and the pastor a further $500 fine for failing to wear a face mask in a public place.
The almost laughable comment in court came from Jeremy Kirk, representing defendants the state of NSW, Health Minister Brad Hazzard and Chief Health Office Kerry Chant. The barrister tried to excuse the state’s horrendous abuse of powers by citing “the right to life as the most important common law right”.
This right to life “defence” of a state government that has banned, suppressed and repeatedly lied about the inexpensive generic drug treatments for COVID-19 while furiously pushing dangerous experimental vaccines on behalf of a corrupt global pharmaceutical cabal is nothing more than gross hypocrisy. More than 450 post COVID vaccination deaths have been reported in Australia so far this year – more than the claimed number of COVID deaths.
The barrister then suggested that if “pastors, reverends or rabbis” who gave evidence in the court had real concerns about the health and safety of their members of their community or congregations they could “go visit them” with their “reasonable excuse”.
The case before the Federal Court of Australia is challenging restrictions on religious gatherings by the NSW and Victorian state governments and the legitimacy of lock downs in general. It continues next Wednesday (September 10).
The court directions hearing will cover questions on the validity of certain state Acts and consider how several Constitutional matters under Section 109 proceed as well. Section 109 essentially says Commonwealth Acts prevail against state Acts that are inconsistent with the former. It is now widely known that state health acts under which the so-called public health orders are made are inconsistent with the Commonwealth Biosecurity Act.
Plaintiffs are Rabbis Menachem Kamenetzky and Rabbi Zvi Telsner and Sydney-based Baptist Ministers Rev. Christopher Athavle and Rev. Robert Ayoub, as well as Presbyterian Rev Robin Tso, from the Hunter region. The rabbis are seeking to observe their Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur services through September at their synagogues.
Lead solicitor in the case Tony Nikolic said the action involved two critical elements – an expedited injunction to allow religious Jews in NSW and Victoria to congregate in synagogues for the religious high-holiday of Rosh Hashanah from Monday, September 6, and secondly, a broader action against the NSW and Victorian governments and the Commonwealth of Australia.
It is alleged that none of the governments have the constitutional or common law power to deny NSW and Victorian citizens their religious freedom, including fulfilling particular religious obligations and practices in designated houses of worship.
The filing argues that NSW and Victoria have selectively discriminated against religious groups by stopping them from congregating in houses of worship which the governments have deemed “non-essential” while allowing citizens to congregate in retail outlets such as supermarkets, newsagencies and liquor stores.
Complainants also argue that houses of worship provide significant spiritual, psychological and emotional support for people, especially for those suffering financially and psychologically from the impact of the governments’ lockdown policies and that the states’ indiscriminate selection of “essential” and “non-essential” venues under public health orders are not supported by robust scientific or medical evidence.
They have called on Jayanta Bhattacharya, Professor of Medicine at Standford University (California, USA) to provide an independent expert report in support of the action brought forward by the plaintiffs.
Mr Nikolic said the action followed similar ones in the United States in which the US Supreme Court ruled that US state governments did not have the constitutional power to deny Americans’ religious freedom by indiscriminately closing houses of worship while allowing other venues to remain open.
“Courts in other jurisdictions such as Scotland have also ruled that COVID-19 measures cannot indiscriminately close houses of worship. Importantly, seeking injunctive relief from the Federal Court of Australia is the last possible venue for the plaintiffs to have their religious freedoms protected,” he said.
“My clients have attempted to engage with the NSW and Victorian premiers and their ministers as well as various NSW, Victorian and Federal parliamentarians to have their grievances addressed in a diplomatic and respectful manner.
“Unfortunately, in the context of NSW, the NSW Government has been unwilling to engage with my clients in any meaningful dialogue. As a result, our only last venue for relief is the courts. Alternatively, in the context of Victoria, while meaningful dialogue did occur, the Victorian Government failed to acknowledge and respect the religious freedoms of my clients,” he said.
He noted that churches and synagogues in the action were willing to adhere to exactly the same health measures required by the NSW and Victorian public health orders which are required of venues deemed “essential”.
“The churches and synagogues which special counsel and I are representing in this action are happy to meet all of the NSW and Victorian governments’ health requirements, including the use of hand sanitisers, facial masks, QR codes and social distancing,” Mr Nikolic said.
“If these measures are satisfactory for supermarkets, newsagents and liquor stores, we argue that these measures should be satisfactory for houses of worship, especially given that Australians have a constitutional and common law right of religious freedom, observance and practice.” Part of Friday’s court proceedings can be viewed online.
Climate change judgement in Federal Court says Minister must protect young people
By HARRY PALMER
Federal Court judge Mordecai Bromberg delivered a landmark judgement 27 May 2021 that federal Environment Minister Sussan Ley has a duty of care to avoid harm to young people as a result of climate change.
The litigants, eight Australian high school students Anjali Sharma, Isolde Shanti Raj-Seppings, Ambrose Malachy Hayes, Tomas Webster Arbizu, Bella Paige Burgemeister, Laura Fleck Kirwan, Ava Princi and Luca Gwyther Saunders and a catholic nun, Sister Marie Brigid Arthur acted as their representative.
Respondents were federal Minister for the Environment and Vickery Coal Pty Ltd.
After reading the judgement I query who paid the students’ surmountable legal costs. A three day hearing represented by senior counsel, Mr Noel Hutley, junior counsel Mr E Nekvapil, Ms K Brazenor, Ms S Brenker and solicitor David Barnden of Equity Generation Lawyers. Unless this legal team appeared pro bono their fee would keep the North Shore for a year.
Spokeswoman for the high school students, Ava Princi, (pictured) a pivotal member of ‘School Strike 4 Climate’, a high school group of mislead environmentalists and climate change activists said “I’m thrilled because this is a global first,”
“We understand it is the first time a Court anywhere in the world has ordered a government to specifically protect young people from the catastrophic harms of climate change.”
This judgement could have flow-on consequences for projects seeking to increase Australia’s production of coal.
Fortunately most serious scientists across the world say climate change or global warming is nonsense.
Labor politicians will seize on this dodgy judgement and it could affect the neglected majority which is often denied constitutional protection. However governments could challenge the Federal Court finding in the High Court.
One example of failed constitutional duty of care by government is out-of-control young Aboriginal thugs and ethnic youth gangs which rampage with immunity around the nation when non-Aboriginal Australians are subject to the full weight of law.
Dodgy WA Judge’s attack against Senator Culleton will be remedied
Dec 23, 2016
Western Australian Independent Senator, Rodney Culleton has clarified today’s court orders in light of another misinformed attack from Pauline Hanson.
“I have successfully been awarded a stay against the court order for 21 days, therefore my staff and I will continue to serve the people of Western Australia in my continued capacity as a Senator,” Senator Culleton said.
“This has been confirmed with two senior legal opinions. I will address the alleged primary judgement which the unforeseen High Court referral has diverted my attention from.”
“I will allege that at today’s court appearance, Federal Court Judge Barker ignored all the affidavits of service and again failed to allow me due process, instead pushing through without referral to these important statements of fact.”
Judge Barker’s claim today that his court on Monday was conducted in a very orderly manner flies in the face of his contradictory comments on Monday, in which he referred to his court as ‘a circus’.
“This has been a major miscarriage of justice,” Senator Culleton said.
“This, and other cases I’ve been involved in (Greg Kenney) goes to show how the courts and judges need a major overhaul and more accountability.”
“To paraphrase Judge Barker’s own retort, ‘No one is above the law’…and that includes the judiciary, who must also operate within the boundaries of procedural fairness and due process. They are not exempt.”
Senator’s lawyers stated on affidavit, “I have received substantial payment into my Trust Account on behalf of Mr Culleton which I am instructed can be used to pay his creditors”.
“Judge Barker however, ignored that statement and allegedly his responsibilities in this instance, he didn’t even ask for the value of my assets,” Senator Culleton said
“How can he claim such an order, without accepting all admissions of fact?”
“Dick Lester has never wanted to settle in currency, he wants the intellectual property from my invention. This was confirmed yesterday by his lawyers,” Senator Culleton stated.
“When judges continuously appear to fail in their duty of care to families and individuals, it vindicates the calls for more accountability through a system of election or appointment for a set period, subject to performance and ability.”
“Judge Barker chose to refuse my right to a jury, my right to be heard without the orchestrated obstruction of two apparent associates or advisors for the plaintiff, in Monday’s hearing and refused to allow me to read my evidence, after allowing the court to proceed in my absence.”
“Judge Barker told me that he was ‘not interested’ in the contents of the two VRO’s produced, an indictment on the claims of government, the courts and law enforcement authorities that a V RO actually protects the victims of violent behaviour.”
“The tragic loss of life in another WA courtroom the following day, is testament to the error in trivialising these court ordered restraining orders.”
Letter to Turnbull from senior law researcher says Governor General not legitimately employed
Dear Prime Minister,
Writing to you appears to be a waste of time, but nonetheless I think you should listen to what I am about to tell you. In 1965 without a referendum as prescribed by S 128 Constitution the Parliament of the Commonwealth introduced Decimal Currency. In 1966 without a referendum courts of Judicature were abolished in Bankruptcy jurisdiction and Star Chambers introduced at the option of a Judge. ( S 30 (3) Bankruptcy Act 1966. One David John Walter of Herberton Queensland has been made Bankrupt in one of these Star Chambers probably by a Registrar. He says he cannot be made bankrupt for a Costs Order expressed in Australian Dollars. S 3 Australian Constitution, prescribes the Salary of the Governor General SHALL by paid in pounds.
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and wife Lucy, arrive at Kinselas to enjoy the Sydney mardi gras parade.
Picture: Kristi Miller, Source:News Corp Australia
Since the Salary of the Governor General has not been paid in Pounds, since 1966, he argues that the Governor General has not been legitimately employed, and the whole system of Government has become corrupted by this error. He argues that NO Legislation since 1966 has been legitimately approved by any Governor General because none of them have been paid in legitimate currency. Notwithstanding that, the fraud industry in Bankruptcy must be addressed. I have been pushing for this since 1993, and made a vexatious litigant for continuing to do so. Telling the truth is vexatious to some.
David John Walter tried to have the Federal Court of Australia Judicially Review the possession order against him issued by a Star Chamber in Queensland. A State Star Chamber and the Federal Court of Australia says they have no jurisdiction to do so. You should get an Officer of the Australian Federal Police to attend the Brisbane Registry of the Federal Court of Australia and point out to them that S 39B 1A (b) Judiciary Act 1903 written in the language of the Law, English, gives them original jurisdiction to entertain this Appeal under S 2 Judiciary Act 1903. The definition of appeal is also written in English.
By claiming No Jurisdiction the Federal Court of Australia has offended S 43 Crimes Act 1914, ( Cth). A measure introduced in 1914 and tested in the High Court in 1915, in Kidman V The King, to guarantee the integrity of courts of Judicature. This is what the Australian Federal Police Officer should point out and advise that this law is still in force, and has been increased to impose ten years jail on an offender. I am aware that the fertiliser will hit the ventilator over this. However I would advise a referendum to normalise the currency before embarking on the adventure of a Double Dissolution. Due to this endemic corruption I am dependent on the Age Pension. I should be a very wealthy man. Along with millions of others. I am very frightened of its ramifications, but no one should have to endure what I and David John Walter have had to put up with.
Peter Alexander Gargan
Peter Spencer court case- Hon Bob Katter MP – Thursday 4 December 2014 – Front steps of Federal Court Sydney 184 Phillip Street, Sydney
KAP Federal Leader and Member for Kennedy
Hon. Bob Katter MP
Will address the media on THURSDAY 4 DECEMBER 2014
TIME: 9:30AM (Sydney time)
PLACE: Front steps of Federal Court Sydney 184 Phillip Street, Sydney
Mr Katter will be addressing the media on
Peter Spencer v Commonwealth – thelandmark property rights case currently before the Federal Court of Australia in Sydney.
Described as ‘bigger than Mabo’, the case has the potential to drastically affect the property rights of all Australians.
For further details or comments from Mr Katter please contact Kelly Thompson on 0418 840 243