ICC Judge Jones & the High Court’s insolvency fraud

ICCJ Jones, AKA Clive Hugh Jones formerly known as Mr Registrar Jones, is a Registrar / Master of the Insolvency & Companies Court, the High Court of Chancery located at the Rolls Building, Fetter Lane, London.

Download this article in PDF. 

In this bombshell investigatory report based on real evidence, we expose the Chancery High Court’s Insolvency & Companies Court and its officers for acting fraudulently in deliberately failing to judge, concealing crucial facts and evidence and evading the law.

ICC Judge Jones is a barrister specialising in insolvency law, he was called to the Bar in 1981, and became a deputy Registrar of the Chancery High Court Insolvency & Companies Court in 2007.

Jones can’t try and argue that he did not know of the crucial rule of insolvency set off.

So, one must naturally ask, why is the point missing from his judgment, when that’s what the case was all about?

Insolvency fraud by dishonest deprivation of statutory set off rights: 

This high-profile case, acquired by this Firm in March 2022, is one of many we investigated where judges and insolvency practitioners are engaging in fraudulent and corrupt practices to procure pecuniary interest by deceptive means.

Alleged criminal judicial misconduct conduct by ICC Judge Jones, Chief ICC Judge Briggs and others within the Insolvency & Companies Court entailed deception to take away legal rights, to deprive creditors of property perpetrated by acts including making false representations, failing to disclose necessary information, and abusing positions of trust. In this case, it was a combination of all three together.

In the public interest, pursuant to the maxim of equity ‘justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done‘  we expose historic acts by  ICC Judge Jones, then ‘Mr Registrar Jones’  that are, in anyone’s opinion, blatant fraudulent affronts to justice designed to ensure ‘justice was not done‘, and proceedings were contrary to the law.

Treacherous  conduct by ICC Judge Jones & the Insolvency & Companies Court

ICC Judge Jones, like all judges in England & Wales swore solemn oath on taking office, having effect on these terms (bold underlined for emphasis):

Oath of allegiance

“I, Clive Hugh Jones , do swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles the Third, his heirs and successors, according to law.”

Judicial oath

“I, Clive Hugh Jones, do swear by Almighty God that I will well and truly serve our Sovereign King Charles the Third in the office of Chief Registrar of the Chancery High Court Insolvency & Companies Division , and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of this realm, without fear or favour, affection or ill will.” 

It is alleged that between 15 November 2017 – 5 October 2018 ICC Judge Jones acted in conspiracy with Middlesbrough Football Club, their lawyers (Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP, Mr Justice Arnold (now Lord Justice Arnold), Mr Justice Nugee (now Lord Justice Nugee), Chief ICC Judge Briggs, ICC Judge Barber and HHJ Philip Mark Pelling in a protracted and severe affront to justice.

ICC Judge Jones acted to deprive Mr Millinder and EEI of the mandatory engaged rule on insolvency set off (14.25 Insolvency Rules 2016), also evading the statutory duty of inquiry (Rule 14.11 Insolvency Rules 2016) to avoid exposing the true facts.

Contractually no money was ever owed to the Club, so there was no debt for them to have claimed, but they claimed anyway, to cause loss with their fraudulently maladministered insolvency proceedings.

Fraudulent concealment by ICC Judge Jones and deprivation of statutory rights

At the heart of the cross claims arising from contractual pre-liquidation mutual dealings between the Club and Empowering Wind MFC Ltd (‘EW‘), and the Club and Earth Energy Investments LLP (‘EEI‘), is the fact that no money was owed to the Club, prior to them refusing the connection, or after.

The Club defeated the contractual purpose, then made an unwarranted demand, forfeiting the lease off back of that, leading to the multi-million-pound claim against them in favour of EW, being the revenue it would have otherwise gained through sale of electricity produced by the turbine.

To facilitate the British establishment’s fraudulent judicial stitch up, they only way they could have done it was to evade the law, so they did!

Law required that the unwarranted demand claim made by the Club in the sum of £256,269.89 be set off entirely against EW’s claim exceeding £10 million, between 15 August 2016 when the Club’s barrister, Ulick Staunton of Radcliffe Chambers, falsely claimed to be a creditor by presenting that claim in Court.

Chief Registrar Baister, an associate of Staunton’s affronted justice, bypassing the mandatory engaged rule, winding up EW in absence of law when the Company was never insolvent.  

Mr Hannon, the Official Receiver of London was, at the same time in that winding up order, installed as liquidator of EW.

The Insolvency Service Technical Manual for Official Receivers

 The Insolvency Service Technical Manual is the ‘bible’ for all Official Receivers with fiduciary duties to act as trustees in bankruptcy, administrative receivership or as liquidators of insolvent companies. 

Nobody could ever say that the Court, Mr Hannon and his cohorts at the Insolvency Service weren’t aware of the crucial statutory duty to have set off the Club’s claims.   They appear to have decided that law and justice did not apply to Mr Millinder, and both his companies.

Two-tier justice prevails;  the legal and insolvency cabal are made ‘are above the law‘, whilst anyone that stands up to their tyranny is penalised.   

Rule 14.11 of the Insolvency Rules 2016 was engaged on Earth Energy Investment LLP’s application of 15 November 2017

Case law – The engagement of Rule 14.11 Insolvency Rules 2016

A few years after ICC Judge Jones and his corrupted Insolvency & Companies Court re-wrote the Act of Parliament on his own whim, in 2021 the High Court in Paragon Offshore Plc Re [2021] EWHC 2275, at paragraph 33, determined when the rule is engaged:

“As Mr Phillips sets out in his skeleton, there is no requirement for a creditor to submit a proof of debt. This is entirely a matter for the creditor in question. So, in order for rule 14.11 to be engaged, there must be a proof which has been submitted and upon which a determination has been made.”

The 3 determinations by the Official Receiver as liquidator of Empowering Wind MFC Ltd engaging the rule on the Club’s spurious claims

On 1 December 2016 Middlesbrough Football Club falsely claimed to be a creditor of EW by submitting a proof of debt in the sum of £256,269.89 to Mr Hannon, Official Receiver deployed as liquidator. The mandatory statutory law of due process required that the Liquidator was to have wholly rejected, or to have set off, the fictitious proof of debt, pursuant to Rule 14.25 Insolvency Rules 2016.

The first decision by Liquidator in relation to the proof of debt claim: 

Mr Hannon, the liquidator, decided not to administer the law when the rule was engaged on Middlesbrough FC’s 1 December 2016 proof of debt.

The second decision by Liquidator in relation to the proof of debt claim: 

After having unlawfully gained sight of the rest of the EW proofs of debt, the Club and their lawyers discovered that EEI were lodged as creditors in the sum of £530,000.

On 20 December 2016 Hannon, the Liquidator, made the decision once again to admit Middlesbrough FC’s second proof of debt, in the sum of £541,308.89, evading the mandatory law of due process that required him to have set off the claim and pursued the Club for net balance owed to the Company.

The third decision by Liquidator in relation to the proof of debt claim: 

On 20 February 2017 the Club’s lawyer falsely claimed that the Club was a creditor of EW for £4,111,874.75, increasing from £256,269.89 of which £181,269.89 was in invoice for energy supply they were contractually prohibited from invoicing for.  £4,031,664.80 was for energy supply!

Hannon decided on the third count to admit the Club’s obviously false proof of debt, when law required him to have wholly rejected the bad proof of debt, or in the only plausible alternative, to have set it off pursuant to Rule 14.25 Insolvency Rules 2016.

Hannon decided again that law does not apply to EW, and decided to defeat the primary insolvency legislation on the third count, by ‘contracting out’ / bypassing the law in abuse of his fiduciary duties to EW creditors.

The Prospect Law (EEI’s) barrister’s pre-action letter served on the Liquidator of EW on 18 August 2017

Prior to filing the application against Mr Hannon, the Liquidator of EW and the Club, on 18 August 2017 Edmund Robb, counsel instructed to act for Mr Millinder, served the pre-action letter on them.

The letter displays a court seal in the proceedings circumvented by ICC Judge Jones, that fell into the exclusive jurisdiction of a High Court Judge!

The Official Receiver and the High Court Insolvency & Companies Court fraudulently evaded the statutory law:

We exhibit below the first and last pages of the pre-action letter specifically requesting that the Official Receiver performed on his duties in respect of the Club’s proofs of debt:

Mr Hannon, the Official Receiver, as liquidator, made the decision to act contrary to his fiduciary duty to have rejected each of the Club’s obviously fictitious proofs of debt, and on all 3 occasions, he decided that law does not apply to Mr Millinder, EW and EEI and he bypassed the mandatory automatically engaged rule on set-off to make gains and to have caused loss through flagrant breach of duty.

Hannon and his conspirators were absolutely safe, knowing that Chief ICC Judge Briggs would cover up for them anyway, installing Jones to act without jurisdiction failing to judge, and that’s exactly what they did.

In the evidence section towards the bottom of this report, we include the crucial evidence, the ICC Judge Jones 26 March 2018 judgment, negating any mention of the crucial rule on set off, which is what the application before him was all about.

The official transcripts of the hearing where Jones’s lies are recorded are straight ‘out of the horse’s mouth’

In his 26 March 2018 judgment, Jones lied to deny the statutory duty of inquiry on the Club’s fictitious claims.

At paragraph 4, Judge Jones said this (bold underlined highlight for reference):

“Paragraph 1 of the Application is made expressly pursuant to r.14.11 of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016  (“Rules”). It asks the court to reject the Second Respondent’s proof of debt that was accepted by the Official Receiver for voting purposes and to exclude the Second Respondent from making any claim for payment in the liquidation under cl.3.4.2 of a lease and energy supply agreement. It is asserted that any such claim is false. The basis for this, in summary, is that no debt could have arisen because the Second Respondent refused to complete that agreement and caused Earth Energy Investments LLP substantial losses, resulting in the Company’s insolvency. The proof is described as “a false misrepresentation” because the start date for the agreement would only have
begun when a wind turbine was connected to the Northern Powergrid. That did not occur, it is said, because of the actions or failures of the Second Respondent”

At paragraph 38 is where ICC Judge Jones proved his credentials, deciding the law does not apply to Mr Millinder, EW and EEI, an obvious non-judicial act, outside of what law intended:

“I have already decided that the Application cannot rely upon Rule 14.11”

Chief ICC Judge Briggs acted without jurisdiction installing Jones to conceal the Club and Hannon’s fraud and blackmail

After serving the Club, Mr Hannon and their lawyers with  EEI’s very serious application against them on 17 November 2017, 4-days later EEI was BLACKMAILED!

At 10.30 in the morning, EEI was faced with a High Court Enforcement Officer, seeking to levy distress on EEI’s goods by turning up unannounced at their offices demanding immediate payment of £619,774.48 arising from the Club’s fraudulent non-disclosure  during the ex-parte financial injunction application case before a High Court Judge between 9 – 16 January 2017. 

We exhibit that unwarranted demand with menaces (blackmail) below: 

The application refers to the ex-parte injunction order of 16 January 2017, purporting to award the Club, just £25,000 for their alleged fraud, when there was no genuine consent by EEI to pay them but for their failure to disclose.

Notwithstanding the fact that the set off rule was automatically engaged, they all once again bypassed the law, knowing no money was owed.

We coin the phrase ‘set off fraud’, commonly known as ‘fraud upon the bankrupt laws’ (see: Belmont Park Investments v BNY).  We recite below, p.2 of the Belmont Supreme Court judgment, defining what ICC Judge Jones and his co-defendants have done, specifically as fraud:

“What is now described as the anti-deprivation principle dates from the 18th century, although the expression “deprivation” has been in use in this context only since the decision of Neuberger J in Money Markets International Stockbrokers Ltd v London Stock Exchange Ltd [2002] 1 WLR 1150. In 1812 Lord Eldon LC confirmed that a term which is “adopted with the express object of taking the case out of reach of the Bankrupt Laws” is “a direct fraud upon the Bankrupt Laws” from which a party cannot benefit: Higinbotham v Holme (1812) 19 Ves Jun 88, 92”

HHJ Baker’s sentencing remarks when he sent Recorder Judge, Constance Briscoe to prison for 16-months for perverting by lying and concealing the crucial facts and evidence to prevent justice being served on her cohorts.

Section 5(B) Perjury Act 1911 / Contempt of Court for making knowingly false allegations certified as true:

It is evidential that the agents acting under the Club’s instructions knew that there were application proceedings pending, after the Club was served the pre-action letter from EEI on 18 August 2017.

The Club and their agents knew, or ought to have known that EEI did not owe them a penny.

The Club’s lawyers, and their instructed agents had the 16 January 2017 order in their possession, prior to lying and saying the EEI owed them £555,000 in consequence of it! 

The mandatory rule on set off was engaged from 6 January 2017 when EEI served their statutory demand on the Club.

On 16 January 2017 set off took effect, automatically extinguishing the Club’s £25,000 against EEI’s £530,000 liquidated sum of the statutory demand.  They evaded the law!

Fraud by Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP in Newcastle:

Being insolvency lawyers, Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP in Newcastle obviously knew of the EEI liquidated sum of the demand, based on the assignment their client withheld in breach of their legal duty to have disclosed.

They acted in conspiracy, evading the rule to deprive creditors of the mandatory right, to have caused loss of over £10 million whilst obviously preventing the course of public justice being served on their clients. 

Due to systemic corruption of the UK, the perpetrators remain at large, presenting a massive risk to the public.

Lord Justice Nugee’s fraud by false representation & or forgery of the EEI assignment

They later relied on the cheating by Lord Justice Nugee, to deface the evidence on the assignment of the debt on which the EEI demand was based, then on ICC Judge Barber and Chief ICC Judge Briggs affronting the statutory law and defeating the High Court Judge’s order, whilst evading the law in fraudulent breach of duty, winding EEI up just two-days after Jones’s abuse, on 28 March 2018.   

Below we exhibit the false instrument High Court Writ of Control that Bristol County Court were obligated to have provided to the Club and their lawyers on or shortly after 2 October 2017. 

Below we exhibit the false instrument High Court Writ of Control that Bristol County Court were obligated to have provided to the Club and their lawyers on or shortly after 2 October 2017. 

High_Court_Writ_Control_07_11_2017

It wasn’t until 21 November 2017 they decided to blackmail EEI in the sum of £619,774.48 and on 21 November 2017, Mr Millinder, acting for EEI, filed the confidential filings in their originating application case (CR-2017-008690).  

It was Chief ICC Judge Briggs who approved those filings in the case, placing the seal on the unwarranted demand of the same date.

EEI’s originating application of 15 November 2017: 

Below in the PDF we have embedded we exhibit EEI’s originating 15 November 2017 application and the crucial evidence and facts all bearing a seal, affirming that the ICC Judges / Masters of the High Court all knew the case was about criminality and fraud, prior to acting without jurisdiction, affronting the law and concealing everything that mattered to prevent justice being served on the Official Receiver and the Tory owned Club. 

EEI_Originating_App_crucial_eviIt was not until 7 October 2017 the Club, their lawyers and their appointed enforcement representatives received the false instrument writ of control: 

On the evening of 22 November 2017 Chief Registrar Briggs met with Hannon (the first Defendant) at Radcliffe Chambers – the Club’s barrister’s chambers

On the evening of 22 November 2017 Chief ICC Judge Briggs met with Hannon (the first Defendant) at Radcliffe Chambers – the Club’s barrister’s chambers.

Prior to meeting with the Defendants, Chief ICC Judge Briggs, crossed out the request that the proceedings before a High Court Judge be before a judge who can judge, and installed Jones who cannot, with intent to conceal the obvious criminality by the Defendants in this case, after having himself approved EEI’s evidence to do with the blackmail just a day prior.

Tab_Y8---Fitzgerald_WS_08_03_2018

That was, just 3-weeks prior to Chief ICC Judge Briggs coming back into EEI’s case, knowingly conflicted to assist the defendants in evading justice by acting to deny justice in rescinding EEI’s automatically vid without jurisdiction winding up order, that was before a High Court Judge when there was no debt! 

Read the article we produced exposing Chief ICC Judge Brigg’s acts in fraud intended to pervert, on 11 April 2018. 

The systemically corrupt police covered up the crimes obviously knowing that the civil judges had got it covered

Here’s the letter from the corrupt Police in Newcastle  who must have known of the premeditated conspiracy by the corrupt judges, to conceal the same crucial evidence and facts as they did, to prevent justice being served on the same defendants! 

Acting Detective Inspector Peter Morgan ‘wished Mr Millinder luck’ at the hearing tomorrow, on terminating his purported investigation into the fraud they wilfully covered up. 

They shut Mr Millinder down, banning him from contacting the police, in case their corruption and perversion was exposed.  It was however, all criminal matters and still is! 

Exhibit_Northumbria_Police_Excuses_13_02_2020

LINKS TO EVIDENCE

We include links to the real evidence relied on in this investigation that we have not already included in the article above:

1. Transcript of the (allegedly) rigged without jurisdiction proceeding before ICC Judge Jones on 21 December 2017:  Briggs arranged for the case to be disposed of, exactly one-month after he became aware of the criminal blackmail arising from the fraudulent non-disclosure by the Club during financial injunction proceedings before a High Court Judge!
2. The judgment ‘purported determination’ by ICC ‘Judge’ Jones of 26 March 2018 
3. Skeleton argument of Mr Staunton, counsel for the Club of 12 November 2018: At paragraph 37, it is evident that Mr Staunton, counsel for the Club, retracted all the claims they were advancing against EW, including the unwarranted demand of £256,269.89 deployed to fraudulently forfeit the lease after they defeated the contractual purpose, by refusing the connection for the turbine, before demanding money for rent and energy supply.  At p.37 Mr Staunton said this:

“Rs do not bring any claim against A, or Empowering or Earth Energy, save that Rs claim £25,000 from Earth Energy under the consent order of 16 January 2017″

In this judgment of 8 February 2019, then Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Geoffrey Vos, said this at  p.108:

“I can understand Mr Millinder’s argument that the alleged assignment (a) referred to the alleged £200,000 claim, and (b) was sufficiently clear to amount to valid assignment under section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925. The words in the Minutes “[w]e [the directors of Empowering Wind MFC] agree to tidy up loose ends on … the £200k that we paid from other accounts so that [Earth Energy], as [parent of Empowering Wind MFC] is assigned those investments, representing what we put into the project” could be construed as Mr Millinder would like them to be”

The Chancellor of the High Court’s 8 February 2019 judgment was a fraudulent and ‘purported determination’ wilfully evading the fraud around dishonest deprivation of the mandatory automatically engaged set off statutory rights.

Having found that the assignment from EW to EEI was effective,  Sir Geoffrey Vos concealed the fraud.

Undoubtedly Sir Geoffrey Vos knew, or ought to have known  about the crucial law on insolvency set off, but he was, it is evidentially assisting the Club and the Official Receiver to ensure they evaded justice , whilst sustaining an automatically void restraint order made illegally trespassing on Mr Millinder’s privilege of absolute witness immunity from suit.

It is a fraud to conceal fraud, and no ‘judge’ has jurisdiction to pervert the course of public justice!

They remain at large…

4.  The fraud by false representation / forgery of the EEI assignment of the debt by Lord Justice Nugee at paragraph 10 of his ‘purported determination’ of 5 February 2018.   

 

Having obviously known in advance of the plan between him and Mr Justice Nugee to falsify the terms of the assignment of the investment from EW to EEI at paragraph 10 of his 5 February 2018 judgment,  on 11 April 2018 we provide real evidence at (5 below) from the official transcript of the obviously rigged proceedings before Chief ICC Judge Briggs, relying on the forged assignment and lying to the Court. 

Briggs obviously knew that Ulick Staunton had lied and that Lord Justice Nugee committed fraud after finding that the assignment on which the EEI demand was based was withheld, but like the rest, he covered up for them!

5. Transcript of the hearing before Chief ICC Judge Briggs on 11 April 2018.

At page 15 of the 41-page transcript before Chief ICC Judge Briggs on 11 April 2018, Ulick Staunton relied on the knowingly fraudulent version of the assignment terms, obviously knowing that Lord Justice Nugee defaced the crucial evidence acting fraudulently.    We recite the passaged from that official transcript:

MR STAUNTON: That’s an exact quote by Mr Justice Nugee of the resolution—-
THE CHIEF REGISTRAR: That’s exactly – ah, that’s where it is.
MR STAUNTON: –which is said to be the assignment.
THE CHIEF REGISTRAR: So “resolution,” which is said to be the assignment.
MR STAUNTON: Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
THE CHIEF REGISTRAR: Yes, I see. So it’s not meant to – that’s a separate assignment document.

Below we exhibit the cover letter serving the assignment resolution, both of which constitute a valid and enforceable assignment according to law, but there’s nothing lawful at all going on with this lot. 

The 29 June 2015 cover letter was in itself notice of absolute assignment, but it referred to the assignment resolution which was found to meet the requirements by the then Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Geoffrey Vos.

6.  The article exposing Lord Justice Nugee’s fraudulent misconduct containing the  29 June 2015 assignment served on the Club on 30 June 2015 that Mr Justice Nugee defaced on 5 February 2018.

Invitation to comment

Judicial independence and an ‘incorruptible’ judiciary they say. 

Nonsense, and lies, we say., evidentially. 

Chief ICCJ Briggs, the new Chancellor of the High Court responsible for conduct of the judiciary, Lord Justice Birss,  the Lord Chancellor, Lady Chief Justice, Attorney General’s Office, Serious Fraud Office, City of London Police, Director of Public Prosecutions at the Crown Prosecution Service and the Constitution Committee of the House of Lords, have been invited to comment. 

Help us to help you, share widely, and please consider a donation to our fighting fund.

What would the man down the pub think?

Comments please.