Facts Part 17

When one looks at the Common Laws of the Commonwealth of Australia in relation to the Judiciary Act 1903 we must take into consideration the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900 UK/PGA in whole with its Preamble defining a line of authority that starts with the blessing of Almighty God.

Through the history of the creation of the Commonwealth of Australia as a colony of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, we must also see how the separation from the Motherland at law actually occurred and the standing as a Sovereign and Free People that came from that separation and what that means for all and sundry that have their families grounded in Australia regardless of their background.

We can see through Case law that the Constitution becomes the central foundation of the country in International Law that is by signatory to International Treaties, Conventions, Pacts and other instruments demonstrated to be internationally recognised as a body of people amongst nations.

66. Cheatle v The Queen[61]
“It is well settled that the interpretation of a constitution such as ours is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of the common law’s history.”

Due to the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900 UK/PGA and the Debates of Federation 1898 it is very clear that the Colonial start to this International Recognition was based on the Laws of England. We have also seen how Christianity forms part and parcel of those laws being the foundation to the Land Claim that was forged in International Law. Without the Bible the Laws of England have no standing with the Monarch and are a non event, it is the trinity of God that gives them a foundation to exist. We see this foundation in the Kings Domain in Melbourne Victoria.

Under the High Court Rules until just before the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II to the Stone of Scone we can see at Rule 5(a) that all the laws that preceded the Commonwealth of Australia have a foundation in the Commonwealth of Australia until they are ruled over by the Commonwealth of Australia. What this means is that all the law preceding the sovereignty defined in Imperial Conference 1926 applies to the Commonwealth of Australia until the Commonwealth of Australia decides otherwise by referendum or case law.

67. High Court Rules 1952
5. In these Rules, unless the contrary intention appears—
“Act” means—
(a) An act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which is in force in the Commonwealth or in part of the Commonwealth;
(b) An Act of the Parliament of the Commonwealth
(c) An Act of the Parliament of a State; and
(d) An Ordinance in force in a State or Territory

a) High Court Rules 5(a) defines a Law of Great Britain to be a Law of the Commonwealth.

In the last post we discussed how the Colonies became States and mentioned Clause 8 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900 UK/PGA. Wont people do not discuss is the fact that the Colonies had all their borders removed via repeal of the Colonial Boundaries Act 1895. This made the Commonwealth of Australia one boundary under one people and became a self-governing colony. We know this to have existed in full until the Great War 1914-1918 and the Treaty of Versailles 1919 declaring Peace in International Laws. This Peace gave the Commonwealth of Australia full sovereignty as an independent Nation and is then declared so during Imperial Conference 1926 where in it is signatory to the dividing of Empire.

Many people are not aware that as a part of the Treaty of Versailles the sitting candidates discussed land borders, at which the Commonwealth of Australia was also party to. In the gaining of full sovereignty under Imperial Conference 1926 the land borders established were those agreed to under the Treaty of Versailles 1919. This effectively made the Commonwealth of Australia one body politic of the people united in a Federal Commonwealth with an International Border agreed upon by the Nations world wide.

The States therefore do not have borders and their parliaments are subject to the Constitution having been handed to the Commonwealth traditio brevi manu as defined in NSW v Commonwealth 1923 and Anderson v Commonwealth 1932. They are not individual body politic and became Public Servants to the people united in that Federal body politic. This is why in the Constitution their performance is relegated to Trade and Business and the business of managing Public Assets for the people and not over the people. The fact of the matter is, it is the people that stand over the states with ability to amend, repeal, and remove their constitutions altogether under Referendum according to Section 128 of the Constitution at Clause 9 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900 UK/PGA.

Application of Colonial Boundaries Act After the passing of this Act the Colonial Boundaries Act, 1895, shall not apply to any colony which becomes a State of the Commonwealth; but the Commonwealth shall be taken to be a self-governing colony for the purposes of that Act.

a) The Commonwealth of Australia is a self-governing colony as at January 1901.
b) The Colonial Boundaries are repealed defining the States without Borders or Boundary.

AS the states were attempting to realign with a foreign power in “Australia” that was forged out of secret meetings prior to 1973, they saw to the installation of Imperial Acts by application whereas before they stood as a power as demonstrated in High Court Rules 1952 being a Law of England in force in the Commonwealth of Australia. The States had sought to regain their standing as individual bodies politic with incorporated Executive Government. We can see by Application Acts in all states that they have been unable to remove founding Declarations such as the Bill of Rights and Act of Settlement. The Bill of Rights is a statutory adaption by the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and stands as a Declaration of Right before it was adapted in Statutory Legislation. It stands of its own right for the people that followed in the footsteps of its foundation.

We know from the Declaration of Right statutorily known as the Bill of Rights 1688 that it was created after James II was ousted out of England as the last Catholic King of England. The declaration was forged to keep the monarchy in future constraint with the people having known and declared rights. These rights are instrumental to the foundation of the Commonwealth of Australia, especially at law.

69. Imperial Acts Application Acts Queensland 1984
Schedule 1
Imperial enactments continued in force
9. (1688) 1 William & Mary Sess 2ch 2, Bill of Rights
11. (1700) 12 & 13 William 3 ch 2, Act of Settlement

We have discussed how the Estate of the People are the Crown and how the Bill of Rights defines this and along with the Act of Settlement 1700 defines them as the birthright of the people. This is defining the Common Biblical Concept of inheritance through allegiance and the foundation of the Common Law of England being the foundation of the Commonwealth of Australia.

We can see in the Judiciary Act 1903 at Section 80 that the laws of the commonwealth are retrained by the Common Law as modified by the constitution at Clause 9 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900 UK/PGA which includes the Schedule Oath of that Constitution. We can see here that this underlying Common Law governs all the courts in their obligations to Chapter III of the Constitution in line with Clause 5 of the Constitution Act. We can also see that Constitutional Law applies to the people who united in a federal commonwealth and is wholly separate to the Statutory Laws of the States and this is before we even venture into the incorporated status the States find themselves in today.

70. JUDICIARY ACT 1903 – SECT 80
Common law to govern
So far as the laws of the Commonwealth are not applicable or so far as their provisions are insufficient to carry them into effect, or to provide adequate remedies or punishment, the common law in Australia as modified by the Constitution and by the statute law in force in the State or Territory in which the Court in which the jurisdiction is exercised is held shall, so far as it is applicable and not inconsistent with the Constitution and the laws of the Commonwealth, govern all Courts exercising federal jurisdiction in the exercise of their jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters.

a) The Common Law in Australia shall prevail
b) Constitutional Law is defined separate to Statute Law
c) The jurisdiction shall not be inconsistent with the Constitution of the Commonwealth

In looking at what Common Law actually is, we can see that it exists in the Commonwealth of Australia as law derived from the traditional law of England as developed by judicial prudence. We have already demonstrated through Section 118 of the Constitution at Clause 9 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900 UK/PGA that Law, Public Act and record, and the judiciary are separated and are therefore separate in classification. It is the judiciary that are through a separation of power supposed to uphold the Law, and Public Act and record as the separated items they are.

We start to see out of this, law common to all the people who united in a Federal Commonwealth being separated from the Public Act and record of the Public Servants who become obligated to both. Public Servants become obligated to the Common Law by way of being one of the people who united in a Federal Commonwealth, yet by being under Oath of Office also become obligated to Public Act and record. It is now in this defining the two sectors of law, that we see, the States of the former Commonwealth after realigning with a power foreign to the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900 UK/PGA are treating the population as Members of the Public and treating that as a body politic outside of the body politic that the Commonwealth of Australia is as a whole.

The unwritten law derived from the traditional law of England as developed by judicial precedence, interpretation, expansion and modification: Dietrich v R (1992) 177 CLR 292 at 319-20; 109 ALR 385.  Generally, a statute will not be taken to have repealed the common law unless it is explicitly or implicitly shows such intention: Fuller v R (1994) 34 NSWLR 233; Corporate Affairs Commission (NSW) v Yuill (1991) 172 CLR 319 at 322, 338.
Bouviers Australian Law Dictionary

a) The common law is derived from the law of England
b) The common law is developed by judicial precedence.
c) Constitutional Statutes may not be repealed and form part of the common law.
d) Debates of Federation by the people form part of the common law.

What we can determine by this is that judicially the people create the Common Law in the foundation of what existed under the blessing of Almighty God before them. Being of the body politic that is the Federal Commonwealth of Australia they are able to modify the Common Law of the Commonwealth of Australia through referendum as per the Constitution. Without this the law is not common to all throughout the whole Federal Commonwealth of Australia.

The States are overriding their limitations in accordance with the Commonwealth of Australia and have aligned themselves with a power foreign that was created in 1973 and by way of Australia (Request) Act 1985 have demonstrated acts of treachery to the people who united in a singular body politic and Federal Commonwealth by seeking to amend the Constitution against the peoples will and against their rights limited by the Federal Constitution at Clause 9 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act July 1900 UK/PGA by linking to a body politic not in line with the act, that of “Australia”.

We can see this by way of Section 7 of the Australia Act wherein they have removed the power of Governor and amended the power of Premier of State at which all states did then amend the Office of Governor outside of any Letters Patent in 1986 or 1987 following the introduction of the Australia Act 1986. The Federal Government of Australia had by way of the States undermined the people and undermined the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia.

This foreign “Australia” continued to undermine any links you had to the former “Commonwealth of Australia” through referendum 1999 wherein it sought to remove any links to the Head of State at which those Governors of State were linked, and to remove any notion of a Line of Authority by adding to the Constitution a preamble to replace the Preamble to the Constitution Act itself.

We can see here, a double standard, in that the Australian Government speaks of the reliance of Clause 5 to install the Australia Act 1986, but at the same time denies the Preamble which features as the definition of that line of authority in that act. They seek to have it both ways, and in doing so have made the biggest cockup of establishing themselves as independent at law with so many broken links throughout the Commonwealth of Australia and its States. This is why they are silent, they know there are problems all over the place that they have created, and they know these problems still exist, this is why they continually try and update the laws and public acts behind the peoples backs.

We will begin to see as we go through these facts why this is occurring. We can demonstrate quite clearly that what was once constitutional, is not incorporated, and we can easily demonstrate that public policy has overwritten the voice of the people. And will continue to do so as long as the people remain silent on the matter.


To be able to keep publishing facts, as well as put them before the judiciary and get answers to questions that have been on the table for many years, your support is required.

To support these efforts, click on the Support link at the top of the page to donate, or link to our online store where you are able to get a shirt to wear and display your support.


  1. We get past the halfway point of these published facts. Exhausting that it is, it cannot be done fully without your support. I am back in the Magistrates Court on Monday to see if they will finally address a Trial Date after over seven months of stumbling around. The Queensland Police Service to date still have not provided a Brief of Evidence including the information regarding the Charges. That is over seven months without being fully informed of the charges, and the legislation they are depending on to file those charges. This already forms a part of the District Court Matters in relation to failure of Due Process. This whole story demonstrates how they manipulate the situation to their advantage in the ignorance of the people, and it is up to all of us to stand up and say no more. This is one big story this time that is full demonstration of how they rely on the ignorance of the people to control the people.

    They may do this to as many of the people as they believe they can, until someone stands up and says, this is not right. And in this, the Magistrates themselves might just find themselves before the District Court of Queensland, and matter might just find their way into the Supreme Court and eventually the Federal Courts, and possibly from there the High Court.

    You wanted change. We must stand up and make that happen. Challenge to this system, means fighting it on its own terms. And in that we are already on the way there. We wont be able to see it all the way through unless you gather in support of it. So please, head up to the support tab above and support this effort.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *