Solomon Vs Solomon & Co Ltd

Solomon  established Solomon & Co Ltd  as per British law in 18th Century.  Mr Solomon used the constitution of Company law to defraud his suppliers. The supplier took him to courts and the courts did identify his intention to defraud suppliers, so did not want to acknowledge the existence of the Company Ltd as an entity, as they wanted to deliver true justice to society. Solomon took it to 'Privy Council' of the Parliament to see if those parliamentarians honour their own law, which they did and Solomon got free of debt, effectively cheating his suppliers.

 

But we have our courts here, the Judges understood the impact caused by the lenders on the society, understood the trouble I took to reach up to them, but did not penalise the lenders.

 

I have approached Members of Parliament Federal and Victoria, like 'Privy council', in Australian System. They could make sure the law they made is adhered by these lenders, but we find the lenders are the ones running the country, perhaps through their representation in some way. The law makers themselves do not support the implementation of the legislation by influencing changing roaster of the judge to hear my case and to hush up the case!!!

 

I taught Criminal Codes Act in Victoria. Criminal law is very weak.  A defence lawyer does not have to prove that his client has NOT committed the crime. It is sufficient if the defence lawyer 'creates a doubt' in the minds of at least one of the 12 'juries'. Create a doubt that there exists a possibility that the accused 'may not necessarily have committed' the crime.

 

This is because of the religious philosophical background of the country that they do not mind a 1000 criminals escaping punishment but will ensure that NO INNOCENT is PUNISHED.

 

But what happened in my case? I am not the one fraudulently charged interest and ripped of Australians, but took the industry to the court proving the point.

 

What Justice (?) Harbison did? She gave the judgement that she did not want to go through whether the interest is compounded or not (this is the essence of my case itself, but she did not want to decide on that). Contrarily, dismissed my case and penalised me to pay $ 10,000 to the offender, Criminal, Westpac Banking Corporation!!!

 

What Mr Vassie did? Went a step above in presiding over a case, that (on his own words) he was not entitled to preside over. He gave permission for 'Special counsel' Mr Strong to represent for Westpac Banking corporation. I was a self represented applicant. Mr Vassie awarded 'full indemnity' of costs to Westpac that made me to pay about $13,000.

 

What more is, that these cases have not been registered/ made available to public from the legal database of Australia, successfully hushed up.

 

I can’t blame them; it is the teacher who taught these people the method of deriving judgement, who needs to be blamed. It is wonderful that such people can eat, sleep and live comfortably after penalising an innocent self represented litigant. They would also be fully aware that I was not pleading the case for my sake alone; they knew it will set a precedent and will ensure all Australians are provided appropriate justice through my case.