Legal Blog

This, I hope, is about Law-abiding people 'entertaining' other Law-abiding people with the fancies and fallacies of statute 'law'. Let me be clear that I’m not referring to Common Law, but statute ‘law' and by-laws which have no jurisdiction over us, without our express consent. Statutes act like (pretend to be) law and have the form of Law, and they are referred to as Law by those who operate under them, but are without jurisdiction as pertains to humans unless you are a legal person working as an agent for, or performing a function for, the entity that created the statute

"The only legal person known to our form of law is the corporation, the body corporate." Hague v. Cancer Relief & Research Institute, [1939] 4 DLR 191 (Man. K.B.)

Who is the "our" in this case law? The court system? The government that directs their court system? "The Crown" for which our government works?

'It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.' –Mark Twain

"Ignorance of law is no excuse" is a maxim of Common Law, but what about ignorance of statutes? Ignorance of statute law is a valid excuse for a man who is not obligated to that form of 'private' law. What of those who, out of their ignorance of real Law, apply statute ‘law' against those over whom these statutes have no jurisdiction? I think we need to hold them accountable. What do you think? 

I'll try to keep these 'thoughts' brief, keeping to a single point. I'll write what I learn at the time and that may change as I gain insight. Many others are involved in the search for truth and I gain from reading their work. I trust this will be an entertaining experience. 

I am not anti-government, rather, I believe that legitimate government can be useful—when it serves the people using corporations to do so—under us, not over us. Present federal and provincial governments are corporations serving other corporations using us—men and women—as their ATM's.

Legitimate government is under the authority of the people, not over us.

“Can a public servant delegate a right that (s)he doesn’t have to someone else?”

If anyone finds error in these 'entertaining' thoughts please teach me where I went wrong.

Subscribe to the RSS feed and/or check back here often and also browse the achieves, as I do update (and correct) details occasionally…

April 21, 2016 - The Holder Rule

The Holder Rule refers to the Holder in Due Course doctrine in commercial law.

Holder in Due Course (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/holder+in+due+course)

An individual who takes a Commercial Paper for value, in Good Faithwith the belief that it is valid, with no knowledge of any defects.

The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC)  defines a  holder in  due  course as  onewho  takes an  instrument  for  value in  good  faith  absent  any  notice  that it is  overdue,  has  been  dishonored, or is  subject to  any  defense  against it or  claim to it by  anyother  person. West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved

We are "Holder in Due Course" of any or all of the following:

March 2016

March 15, 2016 - Adulthood

March 17, 2016 - Democracy?

February 2016

February 25, 2016 - Same Sounding

January 2016

January 3, 2016 - Statutes

January 22, 2015 - The Cryptic Entity — a Person

December 2015

December 1, 2015 - Born Equal, And After That?

December 7, 2015 - Reasonable Limits

December 14, 2015 - Granted the Right to Tax

December 27, 2015 - Reservations

November 2015

November 10, 2015 - Just Another Greedy Corporation

November 18, 2015 - Wake up!

November 25, 2015 - Canada’s Justice System

October 2015

October 6, 2015 - Bottom Lines

October 16, 2015 - The Rule of Law


Use what you read here as a part of your research to establish your understanding.
Your actions remain your responsibility.
All natural rights reserved. © 2012 steven, a man. <><