affidavit of application for injunction in queensland district court

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

REGISTRY:

NUMBER:

Applicant: Loki Verloren(Nee. David Nicholas Vennik)

AND

First Respondent: QUEENSLAND POLICE SERVICEAND

Second Respondent: QUEENSLAND MAGISTRATES COURT

AND

Third Respondent: QUEENSLAND TRANSPORTAND

Fourth Respondent: QUEENSLAND STATE GOVERNMENTAND

Fifth Respondent: GOVERNMENT OF AUSTRALIA

AFFIDAVIT

Loki Verloren (Nee. David Nicholas Vennik) of 10 Sierra Drive, North Tamborine, Queensland states on oath:

1. I am the Applicant.

2. This application is specifically in relation to court matters on file with the following codes:

A) WYNN-MAG-00002362/11

B) CLEV-MAG-00005017/11

C) Notice to Appear at Holland Park Magistrates Court number 2206685 8

ORIGINATING APPLICATION Name: Loki VerlorenFiled on Behalf of the Applicants(s) Address: 10 Sierra Drive

North Tamborine QLD 4272Form 5 Rule 26 Phone No: 07 5545 3402

Email: [email protected]

of 19Signed: Taken by:

3. This application is also a general application relating to jurisdiction.

Manifest of Annexures and Exhibits

Annexures

A) Copy of original “Birth Registration Statement” certified on the back face in the name of

Greg Curry, registrar of the New South Wales Births, Deaths and Marriages Registry

dated 5th January 2012

B) Certified copy of notice of expiry of impound from Queensland Police Service dated 31st

January 2012

C) “Notice of Intent to Allege Previous Convictions” containing a list of fines that I have

not yet been served properly.

D) Certified copy of “Birth Certificate” issued 20th May 2010 by NSW BDM Registry

E) “Application for Injunction against Harassment, Tortious Interference of Contract,

Breach of Trust and Unauthorised Practise of Law and Demand for Return of

Unlawfully Confiscated Property” two pages sworn as an affidavit 18th January 2012

F) Response from Holland Park Magistrates Court containing the response, “this court does

not have statutory power to grant injunctive relief.”

G) Letter to Ministers, Neil Stuart and Anascacia Palaszczuk regarding the ongoing action

and proof of service via Registered Post sent 28th November 2011 along with a data CD

containing the files that were sent on a data DVD accompanying this can be found in

Exhibit “B”

Exhibits

Exhibit “A” being an envelope with a series of documents filed into the Wynnum

Magistrates Court Registry and then returned by the magistrate one Zac Zarra on the 23rd of

November 2011. Documents contained within are as follows, in date order:

1. “Affidavit of Standing” filed 26th October 2011 with 4 annexures showing the date at

which I first demanded to know what jurisdiction I was in and evidence proving it,

the certifications upon them dated 15th August 2011, and the originals bearing the

dates 29th July 2011 and 10th August 2011.

2. “Common Law Lien Notice and Demand” dated 31st October establishing equitable


claim on property held in custody.

3. “Affidavit” dated and filed 9th November 2011 containing a formal demand for proof

of obligation.

4. “Affidavit of Demand for Proof of Obligation” dated and accepted for filing 21st

November 2011.

5. Envelope written on by magistrate bearing his signature on the front and initialled as

a seal over the envelope flap. This originally contained the two folded documents

inside being (1) and (2)

Exhibit “B” being a data CD containing digital copies of documents sent along with the

letter in Annexure “G”.

Nature of Cause of Action

4. Duty: In all of these matters it has been presumed by both the Queensland Police Service,

Queensland Transport and the Queensland Magistrates Court that I was during the time of

the offence operating in the capacity of an entity under statutory jurisdiction, despite my

clear, repeated, unrebutted and unequivocal verbal and written statements in the form of

affidavits that I am not in fact under such jurisdiction, and the total absence of any evidence

offered to the contrary, despite repeated demands for such evidence to be produced dating

back to 29th July 2011. See “Affidavit of Standing” in Exhibit “A”.

5. Breach: To proceed to act in appropriating property, demanding payment and specific

performance without satisfying a demand for proof of obligation is a violation of due

process and contract and any act performed after such a query is submitted and remains

unanswered that assumes before answering such a query the answer is already in their

favour is acting ultra vires. Evidence of a pre-existing query of such can be found in Exhibit

“A” “Affidavit of Standing” being a notice and follow-up default notice to the Attorney

General of Australia and as mentioned, the magistrate Zac Zarra at Wynnum Magistrates

Court removed these documents from the record.

6. Proximate Cause: These actions have caused me a loss of property, financial loss in lost

earnings and extra expenses I would otherwise not have to incur, and impaired my ability to

freely and peaceably go about my business, protect myself and travel on public roads

without impairing any other's rights or trespassing on their private property.


7. Damages: As a result of these presumptions I have been forced by police officers and a

magistrate to submit to detention and arrest, to sign undertakings as to bail, to appear in

court three times, incarcerated for a period of approximately 48 hours and had my property

confiscated and impounded, all against my will, without my consent, at the threat of force

and absent any proof of obligation or jurisdiction, and now as shown in Annexure “B” my

property permanently separated from my estate.

Evidence in Support of Claim

8. Evidence of Duty: Attached as Annexure A is a certified copy of my New South Wales

Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages Birth Registration Statement, which proves that I

am entitled to operate in a capacity under inherent jurisdiction, a superseding and superior

title to the statutory title created by a derivative, government issued document, a New South

Wales Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages document titled ‘Birth Certificate’, from

which all other registrations, licences and accounts with various departments of Australian

State Governments and the Federal Government, including all of the Respondents named in

this application are derived.

9. Evidence of Breach, Proximate Damage and Damages: Annexure “B” shows a notice

from the Queensland Police Service that indicates that contrary to statements on the record

and documents contained in the court file at the Cleveland Magistrates Court, the Magistrate

did not grant the 3 month impound the QPS said they were going to apply for, for which

Annexure “C” is the basis of such action and the total lack of disclosure of the failure of this

application, and the duty to protect my property has been abandoned contrary to the trust

relationship proven by Annexure “A”.

10. The actions by QPS in co-operation with the Brisbane Magistrates Court show intent to

conspire to operate a racket seeking to extract property or funds from my estate without any

evidence of a contract that obliges me to allow this to occur and the abuse of privilege

shown via the clear intent to use any amount of force required to force me to submit to such

presumed authority, and any claimed evidence proving that I voluntarily accepted this action

is void as in the circumstances in which such evidence was produced I was under duress and

no contract is enforceable when executed under duress.

11. Annexure “B” provides evidence of the fact I have been denied access to my rightful

property and by the nature of the property denied the freedom to travel peacefully on public

roads, which is contrary to my inherent rights and a violation of the principle that all are


equal before the law, and that I have not been properly informed in a timely manner as to

changes in the actions to be taken against my estate which I believe is a violation of due

process of law.

12. Furthermore, the Respondents have demonstrated a clear intent through their ongoing and

recurring actions against me that they have no intent to cease their unlawful prosecution

without superior authority within the government ordering them to do so, hence the

necessity for me to file this application in a higher court.

13. Exhibit “A”, being a large envelope full of affidavits stamped as received by the Wynnum

Magistrates Court is evidence of a breach of due process as none of these documents,

including a lien, were permitted by the magistrate Zac Zarra of the Wynnum Magistrates

Court to remain on the record despite being duly sworn and certified counterclaims to

charges already on the record as the summary court brief for the case.

Lack of Disclosure by Respondents

14. I was never informed by any statutory body at any time that the use of my Birth Certificate

to identify myself constituted tacit consent of jurisdiction to the issuer of this title, being the

government registry, thereby placing me under statutory jurisdiction.

15. This Title placed me into the role of trustee with the Government as beneficiary, which I

believe constitutes tortious interference of contract and a breach of trust as I at no time, as I

repeatedly stated in numerous affidavits that magistrates refused to allow to remain on the

file, as well as verbal statements to both police and court officers, have ever accepted

voluntarily to be bound by government statute, and no evidence proving obligation has been

produced despite repeated demands for such evidence.

16. The instrument in Annexure “A” was given to the government to be held in trust, creating a

title that makes me the beneficiary and the government the trustee, and now that I am of the

age of majority, I can at any time claim the previously abandoned position of

Director/Executor/Administrator, in inherent jurisdiction, which has superior authority to

that of the derivative title from the birth certificate, and indeed any title under statutory

jurisdiction, and such claim I have made since July 2011 as shown in Exhibit “A” “Affidavit

of Standing”.

Partiality of Judicial Officers

17. The actions at law being prosecuted against me, in the absence of proof of obligation I


believe constitutes the unauthorised practice of law, the magistrates presiding have been

practising law from the bench and violating due process by allowing the matter to continue

to be prosecuted despite my clear and unrebutted claims of there being no jurisdiction and

repeated and unsatisfied demands for proof of obligation.

18. The court record will show other examples in particular from the magistrate at Wynnum

who ordered duly filed affidavits to be taken off the file.

19. The magistrate at Cleveland also advised me that I could not bring matters of equity to the

Queensland Magistrates Courts.

Standing

20. As a result of this lack of disclosure, baseless presumptions, unauthorised practice of law

and omissions I have suffered many incidents of harassment, unlawful detention,

confiscation of property, unlawful demands for payment and specific performance from

representatives of statutory bodies such as the police and taxation that I believe gives me a

chose in action for seeking damages and at minimum, injunction.

21. I believe that I also have grounds for a criminal complaint and that the continuing action on

the part of the respondents appears to be making such action necessary though at this point

in time I am still ready to allow settlement via the return of property and cessation of

unlawful prosecution.

Nature of Relief Sought

22. For the immediate and perpetual cessation of such action I seek an injunction against

RESPONDENTS to cease presuming to act as though I am under their jurisdiction when it is

clearly and unequivocally proven that I am not by Annexure A.

23. Furthermore, as I have had property removed from my possession, namely the motorcycle

named in the court files listed in 2a and 2b above as well as a pair of knives likewise listed

in 2a and 2b, I demand that these items to be returned to me, directly, to my domicile at 10

Sierra Drive, North Tamborine, Queensland, as soon as is practicable, at no cost to me.

Deponent:

__________________________________Loki Verloren (Nee. David Nicholas Vennik)Executor and Authorised Representative of the Loki Verloren EstateAPPLICANT


Sworn by Loki Verloren on Wednesday, Thursday, 2 February 2012 at North Tamborine in the presence of:

Witness:__________________________________


Annexure “A” Front FaceCertified copy of front face of certified copy of my original Birth Registration Statement from NSW Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages.


Annexure “A” Rear FaceCertified copy of rear face of certified copy of my original Birth Registration Statement from NSW Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages.


Annexure “B”Certified copy of notice of expiry of impound from Queensland Police Service


Annexure “C”Certified copy of notice of intention to allege previous convictions from Queensland Police Service


Annexure “D”Certified copy of “Birth Certificate” issued 20th May 2010 by NSW BDM Registry


Annexure “D”

Certified copy of back face of “Birth Certificate” issued 20th May 2010 by NSW BDM Registry


Annexure “E”

Page 1 of 2 of affidavit of application for injunction in Queensland Magistrates Court


Annexure “E”

Page 2 of 2 of affidavit of application for injunction in Queensland Magistrates Court


Annexure “F”

Response from Holland Park Magistrates Court containing the response, “this court does not have

statutory power to grant injunctive relief.”


Annexure “F”

Envelope the letter previous arrived in.


Annexure “G”

Letter to Ministers, Neil Stuart and Anascacia Palaszczuk regarding the ongoing action


Annexure “G”

Proof of service via Registered Post of letter in previous page


affidavit of application for injunction in queensland district court

Documents

david nicholas

allege previous

south wales

nsw bdm registry

grant injunctive

queensland

queensland

wynnum magistrates