IN THE SUPREME COURT CIV 1877 OF 2010 & CIV 1981 OF 2010 OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA. AT PERTH MATTER: The judgment of EM Heenan J in RE JUSTICE KENNETH MARTIN; EX PARTE CHIN [2010] WASC 212 affecting the following: FILE NO. CIV 1877 OF 2010: The wrongful removal of the Applicant’s Caveats in the Hazelmere and Mt. Lawley Properties of the late Ms. Nancy Cloonan Hall by Master Sanderson in Civ 1775 of 2008; And The falsification of the court records in Civ 1131 of 2006 by David Taylor Solicitor. And The judgment of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia in CACV 107 of 2008, particularly at paras. 54 and 55 relying on the letter of Registrar Powell dated 11.6.2009. And The rationale of the High Court in Special Leave Dispositions of the High Court of Australia in P1 of 2010 of 2010 providing the legal basis for the causal connection between the Applicant’s Solicitor’s Work in CIV 1142 of 2006 and the removal of the caveats of Spunter Pty Ltd in order to enable the Applicant to establish a statutory first charge over the salvaged properties under s. 224 of the former Legal Practice Act, 2003. FILE NO. CIV 1981 OF 2010: The Apprehended bias of the Learned Justice Kenneth Martin and his jurisdictional errors in dealing with Civ 1903 OF 2008 and CIV 1112 of 2007 through his refusal to take into account relevant matters and in taking into account irrelevant matters; just as though his Honour was reasonably seen to be descending into the area of conflict by taking sides with the opposite party and was thus blinded by the dust of conflict; he consequently denied the Applicant his natural justice. EX PARTE NICHOLAS NI KOK CHIN AFFIDAVIT OF NICHOLAS NI KOK CHIN IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF MOTION FILED AND DATED 30.9.2010. Date: 30th September, 2010. Filed: 30th September, 2010. Filed by: NICHOLAS NI KOK CHIN – SOLICITOR LITIGANT IN PERSON 387, ALEXANDER DRIVE, DIANELLA WA 6059 Phone: 08 92757440; Mobile: 0421642735 Emails: nnchin@msn.com; nnchin1@gmail.com | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
. I, Nicholas Ni Kok Chin, of No. 387, Alexander Drive, DIANELLA, WA 6059, Western Australia, Barrister & Solicitor (currently not certificated), being duly sworn make oath and say as follows: 1. I am filing this Affidavit in support of my Notice of Motion dated 30th September, 2010 seeking a Court of Appeal Judge instead of a Supreme Court Court to hear my two applications for prerogative orders filed by way of two Notices of Originating Motion in Civ 1877 of 2010 and Civ 1981 of 2010. 2. The facts herein are true and correct, to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. Where I identify the source of facts stated as other than from my own personal knowledge, I believe such facts to be true and correct. 3. My Notice of Originating Motion in Civ 1877 of 2010 was filed on 9.6.2010 and it is being supported by my Affidavit sworn 9.6.2010. These two documents contain 43 pages. 4. These documents are my ex-parte application made in accordance with s.33 of the Supreme Court Act, 1935 (WA) which dispense with an appeal process, for the purpose of the rectification of the technical slip of the Court of Appeal in its judgment of the Appeal Case cited as CHIN V HALL [2009] WASCA 216 heard on 12.8.2009 delivered on 9.12.2009. 5. The technical slip is to be found at paragraphs 54 and 55 of that judgment that was caused by the Court of Appeal’s reliance upon the letter of Registrar Powell dated 11.6.2009 which incorrectly addressed the issue that CIV 1131 of 2006 was filed on 10.2.2006 by solicitor David Taylor as this event did not happen. 6. This non-event was alleged by Solicitor David Taylor to have happened and it therefore predicated the causal connection between my Solicitor’s work in CIV 1142 of 2005 for an on behalf of the on the late Nancy Cloonan Hall and the removal of removal of Spunter Pty Ltd’s caveat on 10.2.2006. Once this causal connection is established I shall be entitled to my just emoluments as the solicitor for the late Nancy Cloonan Hall and also to my just entitlement to be reinstated as an independent legal practitioner (once the other matter with Solicitor Timothy Robin Thies is similarly clarified). The removal of the Spunter’s Caveats is therefore not the result of Master’s Sanderson decision given on 29.12.2008 in CIV 1775 of 2008. 7. My Solicitors work in the removal of the Spunter’s Caveats entitles me to a statutory charge upon the Hazelmere and Mt. Law Properties under s. 244 of the former Legal Practice Act, 2003. 8. Exhibit NNC-1 is the first page of the Writ of Summons in CIV1131 of 2006 handed over to the late Nancy Cloonan Hall, purportedly by His Honour Justice Simmonds. She, Nancy on-delivered it to me for my safe-keeping. This page indicates that David Taylor Solicitor falsified this court document to make it looks as if the full filing fees of $654.00 in cheque and 20 cents in cash were paid by him to the Supreme Court of WA on 10.2.2006 when it was actually paid only on 16.2.2006 after he was alerted by me to do so on 15.2.2006. 9. Exhibit NNC-2 is the first page of the 29 pages of the Affidavit of David Taylor which contains the evidence already provided to this court that the filing fees of $654.00 in cheque and 20 cents in cash were separately paid and receipted by the Supreme Court of Western Australia on the same day on 10.2.2006 and not in the manner as indicated by Registrar Powell’s letter dated 11.6.2009 that was relied upon the Court of Appeal resulting in the technical slip of its judgment at paragraphs 54 and 55 of that judgment. This original David Taylor Affidavit can be examined by this court if need be. It was handed over to me by the late Nancy Cloonan Hall, again purportedly from Justice Simmonds. Nancy on-delivered this document to me for my safe-keeping. 10. Exhibit NNC-3 is a three page Affidavit of the natural daughter of the late Ms. Nancy Cloonan Hall. She expressed her opinion at paragraph 8 (with the best evidence available to her) of that Affidavit sworn 16.11.2009 filed in District Court Civ 2509 of 2002 that David Taylor Solicitor “never commenced” the proceedings in CIV 1131 of 2006. This means my solicitor work in CIV 1142 of 2005 is the cause for the removal of the Spunter’s Caveat and not the subsequent Master Sanderson’s Order in Civ 1775 of 2008. 11. Exhibit NNC-4 is my facsimile letter to Registrar Eldred of the Court of Appeal regarding the status of the technical slip of the Court of Appeal in CACV 107 of 2008 at paragraphs 54 and 55. The proper procedure to be invoked under s.33 of the Supreme Court Act, 1935 (WA) to repair this technical slip is not through an appeal process and is not an application made to the Court of Appeal but an Application is to be made under CIV 1877 of 2010 through a Notice of Motion which I am doing now. This is directed by Registrar Eldred to me in her letter to me dated 29.7.2009 at sub-paragraph 2.1 – See Exhibit NNC-7. 12. Exhibit NNC-5 is the letter from Ms Mc Cahon from the Legal Profession Complaints Committee which is a sample of its continuing persecution of me in VR 87 of 2009 currently before the State Administrative Tribunal. It is responsible for Justice Chaney to arrive at the incorrect decision that I have a proclivity for making false allegations against fellow solicitors. At paragraph 3 of this letter, Ms Cahon is making a false allegation to the effect that my complaint against solicitor David Taylor is statute-barred when it is never so. 13. Exhibit NNC-6 is my response letter dated 20.7.2010 to Ms. Mc Cahon. It must be noted that Ms. Cahon initiated the persecution proceedings against me to achieve or to create an outcome of professional misconduct in VR 87 of 2008 under circumstances where there was never any professional misconduct on my part. Therefore I have written to SAT that these proceedings should be abrogated and only three issues which are never res judicata so far should be litigated and I am prepared to abide by their outcomes. They are: 12.1. The existence of the pseudo board of the regulator of the legal profession of WA which acted with malice against me. 12.2. The falsifications of the court records in CIV 1131 of 2006 by Solicitor David Taylor which prevents me from independent legal practice. 12.3. The professional misconduct of solicitor Timothy Robin Thies who plundered and pillaged me and my son for zero sum debt of professional fees in CIV 1903 of 2008. 13. On 28.6.2010, I caused to be filed a Notice of Originating Motion in CIV 1981 of 2010 in my Ex-parte Application for judicial review for prerogative orders against His Honour Justice Kenneth Martin for the proceedings he presided in CIV 1903 of 2008 and in CIV 1112 of 2007. This was caused by the apprehended bias of that learned Justice. This document contains 126 pages. 14. On the 22.7.2010 I filed an Application in the Court of Appeal for the purpose of avoiding a Supreme Court Judge to judge CIV 1981 of 2010 and CIV 1887 of 2010 as I then realized that a Supreme Court Judge of the same ranking as those of the President of SAT Justice Chaney and Justice Kenneth Martin would not have the jurisdiction to do this job satisfactorily. It so transpired that Justice EM Heenan who had already dismissed my case for prerogative orders against Justice Chaney in CIV 1019 of 2010 which case has now been appealed to the Court of Appeal in CACV 41 of 2010 could not have been determined by the learned Justice EM Heenan. 15. When Justice Kenneth Martin refused to provide me justice in accordance with the law in CIV 1903 of 2008 and CIV 1112 of 2007, I became ill and my son also became ill. As a result we had to take our holidays in Malaysia. This was caused by Mr. Timothy Robin Thies again demanding for monies from my son unjustifiably and my son was without compensation for all the wrongs that a lawyer, an officer of the court who duty is to uphold justice, had done injustice to him i.e. my son and myself. 25) I informed the Supreme Court by writing to the Registrar that I had to be away to see my sick son Paul in Malaysia and was therefore unable to attend the hearing of CIV 1887 and CIV 1981 of 2010 that came up before the learned Justice Heenan on 4.8.2010. However, I did manage to respond to that learned Justice’s Associate by email regarding my position but not quite (as an application was already before the Court of Appeal which was subsequently not accepted for filing by Registrar Eldred) with regard to a judge of the same rank as Justice Heenan not having the jurisdiction to make a judicial review for prerogative orders against his brother judge Justice Ken Martin and Justice Chaney as he did in CIV 1019 of 2010. The latter case had resulted in my appeal in CACV 41 of 2010 currently pending before the Court of Appeal. Justice Ken Martin decided to go ahead with his decision in CIV 1903 of 2008 despite my protestations to stop him from further hearing my case which resulted in CIV 1981 of 2010. However the subsequent decision of Justice Ken Martin in CIV 1903 of 2008 and in CIV1112 of 2007 despite my protestations of bias is now the subject of my appeal in CACV 75 of 2010 that is also currently pending before the Court of Appeal. 26) His Honour Justice Heenan in his commendable and good-nature ways, perhaps having become aware of his errors in the past, had responded to the contents of my email to his Associate by his delivering his judgment to the same effect with regard to his lack of jurisdictions for prerogative orders against a brother judge of the same rank and this judgment has therefore cleared the coast for me to make an application for a Court of Appeal Judge to hear these two cases so that their outcomes could be used for the further determination of my two appeal cases in CACV 41 of 2010 and CACV 75 of 2010. 27) My aim in these proceedings is for our justice system to provide me fair justice by not avoiding a just determination of the three issues that had been avoided by our justice system so far. Members of the public could read more about my legitimate grouses which is accessible at my blogspot by Googling “NICHOLASNCHIN”. 28) My legitimate grouse is that the legal profession must not be monopolized by cronies who have been plundering and pillaging innocent members of the public without any justice in sight for the victims and it is in the public interests that our justice system should be providing fair justice to the common man. We shall try to achieve this together for the better governance of Western Australia. SWORN by the Deponent at Perth ] In the State of Western Australia ] This 30th day of September, 2010. ]…………………………………………….. Before me: ………………………….. Justice of Peace/ Commissioner of the Supreme Court for Taking Affidavit |
Thursday, September 30, 2010
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MY APPLICATION FOR A COURT OF APPEAL JUSTICE TO HEAR MY JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATIONS FOR PREROGATIVE ORDERS: A SUPREME COURT JUDGE OF THE SAME RANKING HAS NO SUCH JURISDICTION
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment