Natalie Barber - Director/Registrar
State Penalties Enforcement Agency

One of those terrorist arms of ‘government’ – SPER, sent me a letter demanding payment of some money. ‘I can pay you money if you show me that you have a legitimate claim against me’ - was my reply using a method I found on Larry Hannigan page.
No more letters and they disappeared from the horizon as a legitimate claimant to my
money they pretended to be. Not so fast boys and girls and I followed the routine to the point of lodging a formal Claim in the Supreme Court.
Unfortunately, in my case, I had to apply for the ‘permit’ from anglo court and, as expected,
a stooge Flanagan refused it.

Interesting points about the fictitiousness of anglo laws and judges

• I found that in the case ‘Fung v Tam & Anor [2012] QCA 10’ judges using their classical
  ‘abra cadabra’ rules declared that lawyers do not have to have ‘a leave of court’ to lodge
  an application even though the legislation (parliament act) specifically demands that
  a leave has to be obtained.
  (what is a point of having a legislature spending weeks and months creating laws which are later
  overturned by an un-elected, but mafia selected stooge - a mediocrity, a suburbian lawyer???)

Therefore I asked Flanagan to do the same – to declare that I also do not need
‘a leave of court’ to make my application against SPER.
He showed me discrimination by not applying the same abra cadabra rule for my benefit and that precedence seems to be for lawyers use only.

• I showed in the affidavit documents that all necessary elements (according to their anglo laws) for the formulation of legal and lawful contract were there and my case against SPER is a legitimate,
  legal and lawful action for the breach of contract which was created according to law.

That contract has all necessary elements according to anglo law –

• offer and acceptance which created the agreement,
• intention to enter in legal relations, awareness of legal consequences
• and consideration – an exchange of benefits

    He did not accept that and he rejected my application.

• Why would anyone showed ‘respect’ for their shitty anglo laws if they do not respect them themselves.

Below there is all correspondence between myself and SPER

1. In reply to their demand of money for something (invitation to trade /take part in a commercial transaction) I sent them letter requesting more details and proposing (if they wish) to formalize our arrangements. I included my own ‘schedule of fees’
a_sper_fightback1_response.pdf
a_sper_fightback1_Fee  Schedule.pdf

2. As they did not oppose the proposal and agreed with my proposed terms and conditions,
I sent send congratulatory letter about the creation of contract
a_sper_fightback2_sper_contract.pdf

3. After another 2 weeks I sent them a proper, formal, legal and lawful invoice
a_sper_fightback3_invoice.pdf
a_sper_fightback3a_invoice.pdf

4. After another 2 weeks I sent them a reminder letter.
a_sper_fightback4_invoice.pdf
a_sper_fightback4a_invoiceoverdue.pdf

5. Then, after no reply, I tried to lodge a formal, legal Claim against mongrels in court for the breach of contract.
a_sper_sc_form-16-Statement-of-claim.pdf
a_sper_sc_form-2-Claim.pdf

In my case I had to lodge the application which was rejected by that mongrel Flanagan
a_sper_sc_application.pdf

Formal complaints with
Australian Human Rights Commission and
Anti-Discrimination Commission Queensland
a_sper_2015_complaint_discrimination_courts.pdf

The reply from anglo propaganda outfit, used to bully people in other countries into
submission to anglo/jewish blackmail.
by Rebecca Gieng
(common bureaucratic trick to try to keep from public disclosure the true functioning of the system - 'sensitive:personal')
Supervisor, National Information Service
Australian Human Rights Commission
Human rights: everyone, everywhere, everyday

And another predictable reply from predictable people