Taking the state or commonwealth cartel that calls itself a government to court? Maybe they are charging you with some type of breach of legislation, maybe you are appealing a breach of the law in an inferior court, but, either way, you are there and, like Brian Shaw, a couple of years ago in the County Court, you have all your facts, laws, acts, state acts, court decisions and everything you need organised and ready to wear.
So, after utilising your strong logic and appropriate lawful instruments to reach a stage where any reasonable observer will be persuaded to formulate a view in accordance with your tabled views in the court, why, did that strange human appear on the opposite side of the bar table after a recess? And, why did s/he inform you and the court that they were now representing BOTH parties? And, why did s/he hand a note to the business employee/agent acting as a Judge? why was that note not handed to you? why did this stranger announce that she was dropping the case and why did the business employee/agent acting as a Judge immediately dismiss the case?
The answer lies in The Judiciary Act, 1903, in an a section that was introduced by Labor, and assented to on December 11th, 1992 in the “Law and Justice Legislation Amendment Act (No.3), and, further, was repealed and substituted by the Liberal Party on March 31st, 1999 via the “Judiciary Amendment Act 1999”.
The answer lies in S. 55F and it reads like this:
55F Attorney-General’s lawyer may act for more than one party
An Attorney-General’s lawyer may act in a matter for 2 or more parties who have conflicting interests in the matter if to do so has been approved by the Attorney-General:
(a) by way of approval in relation to the particular matter; or
(b) by way of written arrangements covering the circumstances in which an Attorney-General’s lawyer may so act.
There is no choice element present, but, it has to be a fraudulent section, because, how can you be forced into a contract?
Not that helps you much when all of your efforts end up so callously dismissed, especially if you are in the High Court.
So, what do you think about this, and where do you think the remedy to this lies?
I would love to see some of you respond with your ideas in the comment thread below.