“You are no fool Mr Millinder, you know this game as well as I do” – Sir Geoffrey Vos 8th February 2019
Who wants oath breaking, dishonest cheating colluders as heads of the justice system? Well, the answer is, in the UK, you’ve got them and the corrupt Conservative establishment keep them there, soldiers to the kleptocracy. The UK justice and regulatory system, including the police and all the courts forms a taxpayer funded racketeering enterprise thriving off fraud, corruption and gross human rights abuse in the name of justice, led by Sir Geoffrey Vos, now Master of the Rolls, Ian Burnett, the Lord Chief Justice, Robert Buckland QC MP, the Lord Chancellor and their ringleaders, the corrupt Attorney General’s Office who bridge the constitutional separation gap that should be, between our courts and central government.
“There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of the law and in the name of justice”. – Baron de Montesquieu, 1748
They have been using the courts to further principal frauds committed by fellow white-collar criminal members of their legal fraternity, then concealing their frauds and acts of tyranny with inter-agency collusion ensuring secrecy and deployment of effectual gagging orders to prevent their victims from ever getting justice. The corruptors in the various regulatory agencies are being promoted for following their orders. Compliance is rewarded and at the expense of the taxpayer, a typical trait of systemic corruption.
On 11th January 2021 Sir Geoffrey Vos, formerly Chancellor of the High Court took over from Sir Terence Etherton as Master of the Rolls after being promoted by the corrupt Lord Chief Justice himself, a reward for following his orders. Vos now resides as head of civil justice of the UK and, as second in judicial importance to the Lord Chief Justice, his job is to advise on strategy and operation of the civil justice system whilst sitting on the most important cases as a judge of the Court of Appeal. As President of the civil division, he is responsible deployment and organisation of the work of the judges, sitting as Chairman of the Advisory Council on Public Records and Chairman of the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts. A lot of responsibility for an oath breaking white-collar criminal who has been concealing fraud in abuse of the public’s trust.
Vos is paid over £200,000 per year at the expense of the taxpayer to administer justice fairly, impartially, “without favour or ill-will” according to the law. The Promissory Oaths Act 1868 is designed to protect civilians from the kind of tyranny, acts of deceit and corruption proven in this article, but these people are law breakers, as well as oath breakers. Sir Geoffrey Vos took this oath on swearing into office as a judge:
I, Geoffrey Charles Vos, do swear that I will well and truly serve our Sovereign Lady Queen Victoria in the office of High Court Judge , and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of this realm, without fear or favour, affection or illwill.
Vos has acted with favour and ill-will to defraud creditors in the name of justice under insolvency law that is designed to recover assets for creditors of insolvent estates. Judges that break the law by breaching their oaths are not judges, so why, we ask, has the Lord Chief Justice promoted him to Master of the Rolls? The answer is because they have been colluding together to provide impunity to fellow corruptors. Compliance with the regime is rewarded, they get promoted for following their orders, when they should all be jailed.
After his day’s work defrauding innocent parties who come to the courts to seek justice, Vos returns to play Lord of the Manor, residing at his 700-acre Netherley Hall Estate, Mathon, Malvern, Worcestershire, WR13 5LW, breeding racehorses, farming cattle and sheep and renting out a number of luxury holiday cottages. He purports to be a family man, pillar of the community. Now it is time for the people to learn the truth.
Vos had no qualms about defrauding Mr Millinder of his rightful assets, ruining his business and family through the sheer anguish and the misery caused by years of their acts of state terrorism. This cabal of racketeers, operating at the heart of the UK’s establishment have weaponised the courts into places of injustice and gross human rights abuse.
They use the courts as cash cows for collusive unscrupulous regular attendee lawyers and insolvency practitioners. Fellow brethren, most of them being Jewish freemason lawyers who notably all watch each other’s backs, milking the system for fees, often off the back of one fraud or another, aiding and abetting, whilst Vos and his fellow corruptors assist the offenders, making disproportionately inflated gains, substantially increasing the fruits of their frauds.
They steal people’s assets by pen and paper, reaping the rewards, the perks offered by fellow corruptors and the salaries paid to them at the expense of the taxpayer so they can enjoy lavish lifestyles whilst destroying the lives of others. They favour the banks, corporations, insolvency practitioners and the lawyers they collude with, granting impunity, aiding and abetting, or in many cases, as in this case, directly participating in statutory conspiracy to defraud behind the façade of justice. A culture of systemic corruption, capitalist cronyism in first order of priority before justice and law. Their fellow corruptors, the magic circle law firms and those affiliated with the Conservative Party are, at all times, provided with impunity.
The kleptocracy inter-collude with the judiciary, police and regulatory authorities to ensure the acts by fellow racketeers, the effectual state terrorists, are, at all times, concealed, that secrecy is maintained, and that the victims never get justice. The police and regulatory authorities are instructed to turn a blind eye and ignore complaints and cries for help, whilst the courts continue the fraud.
The preliminary consideration was evaded and concealed
Mr Millinder’s case against Middlesbrough FC, their lawyers, Womble Bond Dickinson, Ulick Staunton, Dov Ohrenstein and Hannon, the Official Receiver is absolutely simple. The preliminary consideration is that even if Middlesbrough FC did not refuse the connection for the wind turbine (they did), they still unlawfully forfeited the Lease. All of that was concealed entirely by the corrupt judiciary and Vos was the biggest concealer. There was nothing to try because the completed terms of the contracts proved the case from the outset.
The criminals, disguised as judges deployed a spin of deceit and trickery to conceal the most fundamentally straight forward position, failing to try any part of the case, knowing that it is proven.
The terms of the agreed and completed Option Agreement, Lease and Energy Supply Agreement cannot be diminished. There are two elements to the consideration:
- The Lease and the operative provision of Force Majeure: which suspended the 12-month period free of rent when the delay of Force Majeure happened just 3-months and 6 days into the 12-month period free of obligation from which to “commission the wind turbine”. The effect of the operative clause is that the first installment of rent (£15,000) was not payable to Middlesbrough FC until 15th September 2015. Things are not that straight forward, because from 7th February 2015, Middlesbrough FC did refuse the connection, preventing the Tenant (Mr Millinder’s company) from performing on the rights granted. Thereafter, Force Majeure further suspended any obligation by the Tenant under the Lease. No money was ever owed for rent.
2. The conditional Energy Supply Agreement: There was never any contractual agreement by Mr Millinder (“The Generator”) to supply power and any “invoicing & payment” was contractually prohibited in absence of fulfillment of the conditions precedent that were not fulfilled, owing to the fact that Middlesbrough FC refused the connection, breaching the completed collateral contract. No money was ever owed for energy supply. Our page; the conditional Energy Supply Agreement sets out the position clearly with a 1- minute 23 second illustrated video. Stating the obvious, on 5th February 2018, Nugee had found that all the claims are false, yet Vos and the rest of the corrupt judiciary involved concealed all that. It was all made absolutely clear to them from the outset, none of it is complex.
3. The proven preliminary consideration “goes to the heart” of the damages claim for unlawful forfeiture of the Lease, as it does the fraudulent claims in insolvency and the fraudulent non-disclosure by Middlesbrough FC and their lawyers during both ex-parte hearings. They could not defend the statement of the statutory demand, because the case is proven, so they fraudulently withheld all the evidence that proved it instead and then relied on the terrorists disguised a judges to prevent justice being served on them.
It was against this proven background that the corrupt judiciary certified all Mr Millinder’s claims as “totally without merit” and it was the role of Vos in the conspiracy, to sustain the false instrument ECRO (Extended Civil Restraint Order) whilst failing to try what had never been tried.
On 6th November 2020 Fancourt J had to admit nothing was ever tried in the case
On 6th November 2020, Fancourt, the other layer corrupt judge, said this:
Fancourt J: The Chancellor was saying was that, that the underlying substantive issues have never in fact been tried, that there was an opportunity to raise such substantive issues at an earlier time, but they were not taken as points at the right time and, because of orders that were then made, it is too late to try to raise them now. That, that is really his line of reasoning, I think.
Fancourt was referring to the fact that the preliminary consideration set out in 1, 2 and 3 above had been concealed. From the outset, Mr Millinder’s applications and claims asked the Court to deal with the preliminary issue and the judges deliberately failed to do so. Nothing had ever been tried and that Vos was saying it was “too late” to try the issues that had never been tried. They were concealing and using insolvency to defraud.
When speaking of the assignments that founded both of Mr Millinder’s statutory demands, Fancourt said this.
Fancourt J: Well, it seems to me the position is that the, the validity of the assignment by EW MFC to EE was never actually decided by a judge at a, at a trial.
Fancourt J: But there is no, there is, the point has never actually squarely been decided at a, at any sort of trial, has it?
Mr Ohrenstein: There has not been a trial of these matters.
Fancourt J: No.
There is nothing to try in relation to both assignments, anyone would know that, because the law makes both of them valid from the date notice was served on the affected party.
Fancourt, like Vos, refused to do what the application for trial before him sought to have done and concealed yet more fraudulent non-disclosure during the ex-parte hearing of 23rd October 2020. The transcript of that hearing is particularly revealing. It demonstrated clearly how these criminals pervert the course of justice and use the court to assist fellow white-collar criminals in using the court to defraud. They ignore the law, the evidence and the facts and work only to assist fellow criminals in furthering their frauds.
They conspired to defraud in two ways – both are proven beyond doubt
A £4.1 million fraudulent claim in the form of a proof of debt against the wind turbine sole purpose company:
Womble Bond Dickinson and their client, Middlesbrough FC created a false liability that never was, forming something out of nothing. Fraud in its rawest form. Their fraud came in the form of the false £4.1 million claim, the third fraudulent claim, accepted by Anthony Hannon the “Official Deceiver of London”, an officer of the court who was deployed by the corrupt court to act as liquidator of the wind turbine sole purpose company. Hannon retained the claim, knowing it was false, to defraud Mr Millinder of his democratic rights as majority creditor, to permanently stymie the liquidation. preventing meetings of creditors from taking place to keep the company’s assets beyond the reach of creditors. The corrupt court retained the same claim, knowing it was fraudulent and Vos, along with his co-conspirers, concealed the fraud.
The unwarranted demand false liability used to unlawfully forfeit the Lease was made up of two components. Namely, £181,269.89 for energy supply that the Club prevented from being supplied and £85,000 of rent that was not due.
Unlawful forfeiture of the Lease took place on 19th August 2015 for non-payment of those sums that were never even owed, after the Club refused the connection.
Without a connection, the Tenant, Mr Millinder cannot perform on the rights granted by the Lease. Without a connection, the turbine cannot supply power. The fraudulent claims grew from those two components of the first fraudulent claim.
At paragraph 14 of his judgment , Vos Said this:
The definition of “force majeure” in the Lease and paragraph 6 of schedule 5 to the Lease envisaged that Empowering Wind MFC would be absolved from liability to Middlesbrough caused by any event or circumstance beyond its reasonable control, provided that lack of funds was not to be regarded as a cause beyond Empowering Wind MFC’s reasonable control. As will later be seen, Nugee J held on 5th February 2018 that Middlesbrough’s counsel had unwittingly misled Arnold J at a hearing on 9th January 2017 into thinking there was no relevant provision in the Lease save for the definition of “force majeure”
Vos knew however, that Staunton deliberately misled the Court as did Nugee, he knew from his own statement therein, that Force Majeure suspended the 12-month period free of rent when the delay of Force Majeure occurred just 3-months into the 12-month period. He knew that the effect of that was no rent was payable until 15th September 2015, when the first instalment of £15,000 was payable.
Vos falsified the claim for rent and energy supply knowing that neither were owed:
At paragraph 105 of his judgment, Vos said this:
On 25th June 2015, Middlesbrough invoiced Empowering Wind MFC for a quantified claim for rent in the sum of £256,269.89.
Vos was lying and he knew the statement he was making was false. He himself admitted at paragraph 14 that Force Majeure absolved liability and the effect of the provision suspended the 12-month period free of rent from which to “commission” the wind turbine.
Vos knew that 181,269.89 of the claim he said was a “quantified claim” was sought for Energy Supply that Middlesbrough FC had prevented from being supplied. He knew, as any lawyer would do, that the Energy Supply Agreement is conditional upon Mr Millinder’s “full satisfaction of ” the “Connection Agreement” and “Commissioning” of the wind turbine and he knew, by his own admission at paragraph 21, that Middlesbrough FC and their conspirers, Womble Bond Dickinson refused the connection.
At paragraph 21 of his judgment, Vos stated this this:
He points specifically to a draft asset sale agreement between Middlesbrough and Northern Powergrid dated February 2015 relating to the sale of the substations and other equipment, which Middlesbrough did not sign.
Vos knew therefore that the Connection Agreement was made up 3 salient contracts: the Connection Offer, the Connection Deed and the agreement between Middlesbrough FC and Northern Powergrid. He knew that Mr Millinder could get “no satisfaction of” the Connection Agreement Middlesbrough FC refused, preventing the turbine from operating. More critically, Vos knew and had before him the evidence that proved the entire purpose of the Option Agreement he refers to was for Mr Millinder and the Club to secure that connection.
It was, undoubtedly, for that reason, Vos referred at paragraph 105 of his judgment to “a quantified claim for rent”, because he knew that no money was owed at all. The man is a liar and a cheat, he is a cheat of the law and the name of justice.
It’s like building a brick wall without cement or sailing across the Atlantic sea in a sailing boat, without a motor or sails. Without a connection, the turbine does not work.
Middlesbrough FC and Womble Bond Dickinson defeated the fundamental purpose of the Option Agreement
They all knew that the purpose of the Option Agreement is so that the material parts of any project can be implemented prior to financial commitment. If either party became dissatisfied with either the technical or commercial terms, or any of the material parts being proposed, the aggrieved party could negate without commitment. Having that flexibility is the purpose of the Option Agreement.
When the option is exercised, the material parts formulated during the option period, are affirmed and made final. The case in this respect, proves that in the UK, owing to this out-of-control lawlessness and corruption, no business is safe, because one cannot rely on the courts to administer justice, even when the case is proven.
It is plainly evidenced that Middlesbrough FC’s Robin Bloom, former senior partner of Womble Bond Dickinson, a fellow brethren of Vos and member of the Jewish fraternity of lawyers, typically colluders that all protect one another, had jointly negotiated, agreed and then extended the Option Agreement for the specific purpose of securing that same and only connection for the wind turbine. A fellow partner of Womble Bond Dickinson, Michael Brown, who was advising the Club, made reference to that requirement as early as 25th September 2012, during the option period:
“the need to transfer the two existing substations from the DNO to the club”
The same partner of Womble Bond Dickinson, Michael Brown then “u-turned” on the position and said this on 13th May 2015, nearly two-years from when the Lease was completed on the understanding of the connection configuration:
“I myself made the club’s views clear on the configuration issue as early as October 2013”
This is how these lying cheating criminals collude to defraud. The corrupt fake judges then assist them in furthering their frauds and covering it all up.
They all knew, as well as Vos did, that the connection configuration for the turbine was specified by Northern Powergrid and completed during the Option Agreement period from 12th June 2012 – 17th June 2013 when the Lease was completed. The corrupt judiciary knew that Mr Millinder was fraudulently misrepresented into completing the Lease on the sole basis of the terms of that connection.
They all knew that Mr Millinder was prevented from performing on the rights granted by virtue of the fact the Club refused the connection and they all knew that the connection configuration was a completed collateral contract. They were using the façade of insolvency to defraud creditors, retaining the fraudulent £4.1 million claim to keep the proven damages claim beyond the reach of Mr Millinder and his fellow creditors, knowing that the claim is fundamentally proven. The courts in the UK are the aiders and abettors, the weapon used by corrupt dishonest lawyers to further their frauds.
Vos knew no rent was ever owed to Middlesbrough FC and he knew that no energy supply was owed either, because the energy supply agreement is conditional upon Mr Millinder’s “full satisfaction of” “entering into a Connection Agreement” that Middlesbrough FC refused. Vos knew that the “Start Date” was the date from which those conditions was satisfied and that there was an implied requirement to ensure that the Start Date was within 12-months from the date of completion of the agreement.
Vos knew that on 9th January 2017, Staunton himself admitted in the note of hearing , that:
“For the purpose of the Energy Supply Agreement, Force Majeure has effect”.
Vos knew therefore, by his own admission in the judgment, that Force Majeure had effect and on this ground alone therefore , he knew that £181,269.89 of the claim used to unlawfully forfeit the Lease was also not owed. Vos knew that no rent was owed and no energy supply was owed and that even if they did not refuse the connection, they still unlawfully forfeited the Lease. In full knowledge of those circumstances, Vos lied again and stated this (paragraph 19 of his judgment):
From 17th June 2014, the rent reserved by schedule 7 of the Lease fell due from Empowering Wind MFC to Middlesbrough under the terms of the Lease, but was unpaid.
Vos was specifically taken to this email of 16th October 2012 from Northern Powergrid to Middlesbrough FC, Womble Bond Dickinson and Middlesbrough FC:
“The stadium has two substations both connected to the same 11KV system. These will need to be disconnected from the Northern Powergrid system and connected to the customer owned 11KV network which in turn will be connected to a new 11kv switch house where the turbine would also be connected” (See: the wind turbine connection configuration.)
Vos was shown a further email of 19th November 2012 where the Distribution Network Operator again affirmed the connection configuration for the wind turbine:
The 1.5MVA turbine can be connected locally to the existing supply stadium. The connection arrangement will be similar to that discussed earlier with the two existing substations being disconnected from our system and transferred to the clubs ownership and a new single HV point of supply established.
At paragraph 16 of his judgment, Vos referred, correctly this time, to the fact it was condition precedent of the Connection Offer that Middlesbrough FC did in fact do what the Distribution Network Operator required of them in taking ownership of their substations.
Vos falsified the position in relation to the delay of Force Majeure
At paragraph 17 of his judgment, Vos falsified the position in relation to the fraud causing the delay beyond the Developer’s (Mr Millinder’s reasonable control) constituting Force Majeure. He stated this:
“Disagreements over the suitability of the mitigation scheme led to delays in its approval”
Vos was copying the lies from the fraudster, Jeremy Robin Bloom, the fellow Jewish lawyer of Middlesbrough FC and former senior partner of Womble Bond Dickinson
Again, Vos was simply following what Bloom was saying in his false ex-parte witness statement, when he knew the entire statement false. Vos did however have the correct factual evidence before him in relation to the CAA advice to the council, but again, he was concealing to assist the offenders in using the court to further their frauds.
Vos knew that by 23rd September 2013, Mr Millinder had done what was required to have discharged the condition and he had in his possession that categoric proof, yet he still lied and conveyed only the fallacy of Middlesbrough FC and their corrupt lawyers.
In particular, Vos was taken by Mr Millinder to this comment from the Council’s senior planner:
On 23rd September 2013 13.29PM, Maria Froggatt wrote:
“Clearly we do not have the expertise to consider fully the radar mitigation scheme but we would expect that Airport Safety is not reliant solely on the Planning System. Following Bryn’s advice (see below)it is our intention to discharge the condition and write to the Airport and the applicant to advise that the information necessary to discharge the condition has been submitted and that any further safety issues are a matter to be resolved between the applicant and the Airport.
Any comments before we progress with discharge of condition?“
Vos knew it was the Council’s failure to act in accordance with planning law and to have discharged the condition, that prevented the turbine from lawful operation, when the Developer had done what was required to have discharged it. He knew that is what caused the delay, constituting an act of Force Majeure. That delay was encountered from 23rd September 2013 until 23rd December 2014. The factual evidence is vastly different from the false allegation of Vos. There was no disagreement over the scheme, the scheme has been submitted and approved by Middlesbrough Council’s planning department in September 2013, just 4-months after completing the Lease. Vos had precisely that evidence before him and made the conscious decision to mislead, just as he has done in relation to the preliminary considerations that prove Mr Millinder’s case. It was no accident.
Vos now sits as head of civil justice, only too willing to behave in this way. He is the one giving the orders to his foot soldiers, deploying judges to cases. It is proven that Vos is blatantly dishonest, acting with ill-will to defraud those who come to seek justice in the courts. The leadership lack integrity, it’s no wonder all they lead has nosedived so far southwards. What are the ones he is giving orders to doing?
Vos knew, by his own admission that Force Majeure had effect, Nugee found just that, he knew issue estoppel applied to the finding and yet he still lied and said that rent fell due. Vos knew that the first claim in the sum of £256,269.89 was fraudulent and he knew the second claim originating from the first, in the sum of £541,308.89 was, as was the 3rd exceeding £4.1 million and yet the application before him, asked him to try the multiple frauds and to remove the fraudulent claim against Empowering Wind MFC Ltd.
Vos kept the £4.1 claim there to aid and abet the fraud against creditors and failed altogether to do what the application sought to do. His judgment is a plethora of lies and deceit designed only to conceal the fraud to assist the offenders in evading justice.
We were shown a transcript of a call between Hannon and Mr Millinder on 15th August 2018 where the intent to use the claim to defraud Mr Millinder of his position as requisite majority creditor was made clear:
AH: Middlesbrough Football Club are the overwhelming majority creditors they have more than 75% and therefore unless you can get Middlesbrough Football Club to support, er, er a request, er, you cannot garner the necessary support
Watch the 20-minute illustrated video to learn how blatant Hannon’s fraud is. Hannon, who knew, as anyone would do that over £4 million of the claim was sought pursuant to the conditional Energy Supply Agreement, has some long standing “form” for dishonesty and fraud against creditors dating back to 2007. The corrupt courts provide impunity to them at whatever cost, shielding these criminals from prosecution. Hannon remains employed by the sham corrupt establishment under the BEIS ministers to continue defrauding creditors after the offenders were assisted by Vos and fellow criminals in using the court to further their frauds.
Not satisfied with defrauding Mr Millinder of the proven damages claim that Mr Millinder had filed and paid £10,000 for that Vos was supposed to assign to Mr Millinder and hear, Vos and his cohorts also set out to defraud Mr Millinder of the investments he had assigned.
Affronting the law that makes the assignment of the investment in the wind turbine sole purpose company effectual from the date notice was served on the affected party
They defeated the law they are supposed to administer, namely section 136(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 that makes the assignment of the investments made by Mr Millinder in the wind turbine sole purpose vehicle effectual from 30th June 2015, defrauding him of the investments that were assigned against a £25,000 false liability they all knew ever even existed. These criminals have been abusing the law and the biggest perpetrator is the one that has now been promoted by fellow criminals at the helm of the injustice system, to Master of the Rolls, head of civil justice.
If you think the UK’s courts are impartial and do justice, you are gravely mistaken and this investigatory article proves it.
Misuse of the law to create false instrument civil restraint orders to conceal fraud
It was on 14th November 2018 when Vos, then Chancellor of the High Court had listed an application by our CEO to try the frauds that had ben concealed by the corrupt judiciary under his control and set aside a false instrument Extended Civil Restraint Order that had been deployed by his co-conspirers to prevent justice from being served on the fraudsters, fellow criminals disguised as lawyers. As they all do, Vos deliberately evaded Mr Millinder’s evidence. They have been maliciously and unjustly certifying applications and claims that are proven as “totally without merit” with totally no consideration whatsoever. This is how they originate the false instrument civil restraint orders as a form of dishonest concealment convened to obstruct the course of justice. Human rights abuse of the extreme.
We were shown the skeleton argument that was before Vos for the hearing that proves conscious and premeditated dishonesty and fraud upon the Court. Page 12, paragraph 70 of the skeleton, through to paragraph 85 deals with dishonesty, a fraud on the part of Ulick Staunton, a barrister of Radcliffe Chambers acting from Middlesbrough FC and the aptly named “Womble” Bond Dickinson, the principal offenders.
Sir Geoffrey Vos and his conspirers have been defrauding those who come to seek justice – Fraud upon the Court
It was on 3rd March 2021 that Mr Millinder challenged Vos in his position now as Master of the Rolls, presenting substantive and proven evidence of the fraud and proving how he has concealed the fraud, the same evidence Vos evaded and covered up in his order of 8th February 2019.
In the transcript of the hearing of 5th February 2018, at page 70, Staunton said this:
Mr Staunton: Second page in. Reading that second paragraph, what’s assigned to EEI are the investments, the £200,000.
Staunton himself had admitted that the investments made by Mr Millinder in the wind turbine sole purpose vehicle had been assigned to “EEI” (Earth Energy Investments LLP).
They were all colluding to defraud, knowing that the assignment extinguished their client, Middlesbrough FC’s false £25,000 claim by 26.6 times as of 5th February 2018.
Not satisfied with that, because the law makes the assignment valid, Christopher Nugee, sitting as a High Court Judge, committed fraud and dishonestly represented the terms of the assignment to make its terms not absolute when he knew it was.
On 3rd March 2021 Vos was taken specifically to the skeleton of 14th November 2018, the one that Vos had deliberately evaded to prevent Staunton from being prosecuted.
Mr Millinder had referred to the proven conscious and premeditated dishonesty by Staunton and had set out the fraud in the following way:
I recite more dishonesty on the part of Staunton, who knew Nugee had fraudulently misrepresented the terms of the assignment:
MR STAUNTON: “That’s an exact quote by Mr Justice Nugee of the resolution”
Staunton, a close personal associate of Nugee (they reside and socialise together in Islington) knew that Nugee had committed fraud and misrepresented the terms of the assignment to make it not absolute when he knew it was. During the later hearing before Chief Registrar Briggs, who was also conflicted, Staunton lied again and said that Nugee’s corrupted version of the term was an exact quote by Nugee of the assignment resolution when he knew it was not. They were all conspiring to defraud.
During the same hearing before Briggs on 11th April 2018, Staunton lied any more times:
(A) MR STAUNTON:“and paras.17 to 24. So there’s a cross claim which extinguishes the liability to pay £25,000”
(B) MR STAUNTON: “and if you look at the second page, it’s the 21st March, and this is before Judge Barber“
(C) MR STAUNTON: “There is the cross claim. There is the assignment. So the two grounds upon which Earth Energy invite you to rescind the Winding Up Order were before Judge Barber“
The four lies above came from the rigged hearing before the other offender, Briggs, with whom they were colluding. Briggs had met with Hannon on the evening of 22nd November 2017 after Briggs approved the filings made by Mr Millinder in the application Jones circumvented that sought to deal with the multiple frauds that have been concealed throughout). Staunton himself admitted on 5th February 2018 that the cross claim is the assigned investments. It is proven beyond doubt therefore that he knew, on 5th February 2018 their alleged debt false liability was extinguished by over 20 times”.
An alleged debt that is subject to challenge is not and cannot possibly be a petition debt – the corrupt Court made it so to defraud Mr Millinder
Middlesbrough FC, Womble Bond Dickinson, Hannon, Staunton, Ohrenstein and the corrupt judiciary all knew that Nugee himself made the order of 21st March 2018 listing the application by Mr Millinder to set aside the order said to have been by consent when there was no consent aside anyway.
It was that order of 16th January 2017 that was being set aside that founded the alleged £25,000 false liability that was extinguished by over 26.6 times. They all knew that an alleged debt that is subject to challenge by order of a High Court Judge is not and cannot possibly be a petition debt, but these lawless criminals made it so.
Staunton knew lied and made no mention whatsoever of the order of 21st March 2018 (just one week prior to him winding up the company for the alleged £25,000) and at (B), above, he lied before Briggs on 11th April 2018 and said the order was before Judge Barber when it is clearly evidenced at (D) below that it was not at all.
At (E) below it is evidenced that Staunton also lied about the cross claim and made no mention at all of the assignment, proving beyond doubt that his comments at (C) above at the later hearing are also statements he knew to be false.
On 3rd March 2021, after reciting the above and presenting the transcripts containing the evidence Mr Millinder told Vos:
“If you owe me £100k I am not going to pay you back £1,000. That is the principle behind it, it is hardly rocket science”.
The principle that Mr Millinder was conveying was effectually the rule in set off set out in rule 14.25 of the Insolvency Rules 2016. That rule was evaded in both winding ups in this case.
In the same email, Mr Millinder directed Vos to the proven fraud where Staunton knew he had fraudulently misrepresented Judge Barber to wind up Mr Millinder’s company for the £25,000 false liability they was never even owed against Mr Millinder’s cross claim, the assigned investments exceeding £770,000 plus standard interest from the date of the assignment (over £1.17 million).
(D) MR STAUNTON: Indeed, but that matter has been fully ventilated in front of Judge Jones, terminating Monday of this week when he dismissed (inaudible) application. I can explain what that is. And also, the adjournment to 10th June is because he wanted to make a second application, the first having been dismissed by Mr Justice Nugee on 5th February. Can we go back? Earth Energy has a fully owned subsidiary, Empowering Wind, which is now in the process of being wound up. The liquidator is Mr Hammond from the OR’s office. The subsidiary had an agreement with the petitioner. The petitioner has, as part of that group, terminated the agreement and also a lease underlying it and Mr Millinder then said, “Well, the subsidiary has a significant claim for damages against Middlesbrough”, but it never brought any proceedings.
JUDGE BARBER: It’s not a cross-claim then.
(E) MR STAUNTON: That is the cross-claim.
(F) MR STAUNTON: On 15th November, Earth Energy issued another application, amongst other things that it wants directions that that claim should be pursued. That came on before Judge (inaudible) for the first hearing on 21st December, where he made it clear to Mr Millinder that as the subsidiary had no assets it couldn’t pursue the claim unless Mr Millinder could put forward proposals to finance that claim, and he adjourned it to allow Mr Millinder to put in such evidence. It came back before Judge Jones on Monday of this week where Mr Millinder had failed to put in any sensible evidence to finance the claim and Mr Hammond said that obviously the subsidiary couldn’t pursue it. Judge Jones then dismissed that application. That’s the cross-claim. That’s disposed of Monday of this week.
Staunton made no mention of the fact that the application that Jones disposed of was to be heard by a High Court Judge because it sought to deal with their multiple frauds, in particular the £4.1 million proof of debt that he himself admitted could not be established by virtue of “Force Majeure” (aside from the fact there was never any agreement to supply power).
All three grounds set out below are indisputable and all three in their own right makes the winding up order and the £25k false liability void from the outset, but the corrupt judiciary have concealed all three. They fail to administer the law, because they have all been widely abusing their positions to defraud in the name of law and “justice”. Those three grounds are:
- The alleged £25,000 claim was extinguished by over 26.6 times as of 5th February 2018 and it is the assigned investments that is the cross claim Staunton lied about during that hearing of 28th March 2018
2. The alleged debt was subject to challenge by order of 21st March 2018 made by Nugee just one week prior to the winding up on 28th March 2018:
3. The order of 28th March 2018 was founded by Staunton’s conscious and premeditated dishonesty when he knew, by his own admission that the cross claim extinguished the liability, just as he also admitted, on 9th January 2017 that “Force Majeure has effect“, meaning that he knew that Mr Millinder’s claim against Middlesbrough FC is proven and that Middlesbrough FC’s claims are all fraudulent.
It is those three proven and indisputable points that Pelling then certified as “totally without merit”, providing himself with false jurisdiction to originate the first of two false instrument civil restraint orders against Mr Millinder to conceal their conspiracy to defraud.
Sir Geoffrey Vos – Master of the Rolls – Failing to try what the claim sought to have tried “I have seen no evidence of fraud”
Here’s the application notice and continuation sheet setting out what the application sought to have done. The application was for a trial to deal with the multiple frauds committed by dishonest lawyers within insolvency proceedings. Page 3, the continuation sheet sets out the relief sought and paragraph 5 of page 3 through to paragraph 7 of page 4 sets out that fundamentally, issue estoppel applies to the finding of Nugee on 5th February 2018. Paragraph 7 to paragraph 8 proves that the £4.1 million claim is false and paragraph 9 refers to the part 7 claim seeking remedy for the wrongdoing.
Vos knew that the preliminary consideration, is proven by virtue of the contracts originating it and the finding of Nugee J. Paragraph 7 of the continuation sheet, is inextricably linked with the fact that all the claims are fraudulent and that Middlesbrough FC and their conspirers could not defend the claim proven by virtue of the fact that they cannot dispute that they unlawfully forfeited the Lease.
The £25,000 false liability was created by this cabal, to defraud Mr Millinder of the assigned investments exceeding £640,000, including standard interest from the date of the assignment notice. All the way through Vos and his cohorts knew that the alleged £25k debt was subject to challenge, listed for a hearing by a High Court Judge, just one-week prior to the winding up.
At paragraph 3 of his judgment, knowing that the fraudulent £4.1 million claim was being used to defraud Mr Millinder of his interest as requisite majority creditor with over 85% of the voting interest, Vos said this:
As will appear from this judgment, this case provides an example of how those making use of limited liability companies for their trade need to understand the consequences of so doing. Once companies are wound up, the directors no longer have control of their affairs. That has been Mr Millinder’s problem, but it is one that he seems not, until recently perhaps, fully to have understood.
The authorities – False claims in insolvency proceedings – It is not res judicata to challenge a debt in insolvency even if the debt is founded by a judgment
The comments of Vos at paragraph 3 above defeat the rule of law itself and the purpose of the Insolvency Act 1986 and the Insolvency Rules 2016, legislation that is designed to recover assets for creditors of insolvent estates.
At paragraph 7 of his judgment, Vos said this:
The Application also asks the court to set aside orders made by ICC Judge Jones on 26th March 2018, a winding up order made against Earth Energy Investments LLP (“Earth Energy”) on 28th March 2018, and to determine that none of Mr Millinder or his companies ever owed any monies to Middlesbrough. As will later appear, the basis on which I directed the hearing that has given rise to this judgment was as an application to discharge the ECRO, made under paragraph 3.2(2) of Practice Direction 3C. No permission has been given under the ECRO for any other applications to be made
Vos knew there was only one application, it was the one to try all the frauds and the fact that the ECRO is a false instrument originated by the corrupt judiciary to conceal those frauds and Vos continued doing precisely that. It was Vos who gave permission to make the application and the application was for trial of the issues. He sought to conceal the issues by fettering the court’s duty to deal with all the issues that were to be tried, knowing that his cohorts had concealed the same frauds from the outset. The application also asked Vos to assign the claim that had been filed and served, from Empowering Wind MFC Ltd to himself. He failed in his duty to do anything, because he was working for the offenders.
At paragraph 101 of his judgment Vos stated this:
“I should say at once that Mr Millinder cannot ask me now to decide whether Nugee J and HHJ Pelling were mistaken about the validity of the alleged assignment. That could only have been done on appeal from those decisions, which are now out of time”
Vos, acting dishonestly, knew, as any judge would do and certainly as Mr Millinder does, it is not res judicata to set aside any order or claim in insolvency proceedings “if there is not a debt due in truth and reality”. Vos sought to fetter his jurisdiction to do what the application Mr Millinder made sought to do, just as all the rest of the judges in the case have done from the outset in this case. Vos did know and was taken to, the famous authority of the superior court:
In: Re Fraser, ex parte Central Bank of London  2 QB 633, CA
It was cited by Lord Eldon that: “Proof upon a judgment will not stand merely upon that, if there is not a debt due in ‘truth and reality,’ for which the consideration must be looked to.” Can this judgment be treated as conclusive in bankruptcy because the debtor has unsuccessfully attempted to set it aside? I think not, and I cannot see how the matter is any more res judicata because there has been an unsuccessful appeal to this Court. I agree in all that the Master of the Rolls has said on this point”
Analysis: Fraser was a judgment debtor, who had exhaustively challenged the imposition of a judgment debt upon him, but without success. Fraser’s application to set aside the judgment debt had failed before a Master (twice), Judge (once), Divisional Court (once) and Court of Appeal (once), yet this presented no bar in the Bankruptcy Court. Fraser’s applications were not maliciously certified as “totally without merit” to conceal the frauds. The leading authority setting the precedent is far from isolated:
In Dawodu v American Express  BPIR 983
The former Master of the Rolls, Sir Terence Etherton considered an appeal by Mr Dawodu against a bankruptcy order founded on a petition respective of a ‘series of judgment debts and interest’ amounting to £15,000. None of the orders relied upon by the petitioning creditor, American Express had been appealed by Mr Dawodu. After referring to the established threshold of ‘some fraud, collusion, or miscarriage of justice’, Etherton J found, at paragraph 990D of the judgment that:
“The latter phrase is of course capable of wide application according to the particular circumstances of the case. What in my judgment is required is that the Court be shown something from which it can conclude that had there been a properly conducted judicial process it would have been found, or very likely would have been found, that nothing was in fact due to the Claimant. It is clear that in those circumstances the Court can enquire into the judgment and the judgment debt, even though the debtor himself has previously applied to have the judgment set aside, and even though that application has been refused and that refusal has been affirmed by the Court of Appeal”
The two authorities prove that the Court has a duty to investigate “if there is not a debt due in truth and reality”. Again, the two authorities are not unique:
In Re Hawkins (1865) 1 QB 404
The authority was recited in a slightly different context:
“the Court of Bankruptcy is not bound by a judgment at law, but is entitled to investigate all the facts of the case whenever, but not before, a prime facie case impeaching the judgment is made out. Otherwise a man might defeat all his just creditors by allowing judgment to be taken by default or consent”
“The principle appears to be that it would be… unjust to the general body of creditors to permit one creditor, by means of a judgment which had no solid foundation, to obtain an undue advantage over them, and obtain payment of his alleged debt in full to their prejudice”
Vos and his fellow corruptors fettered the Court’s jurisdiction when he knew, as any lawyer would do, that both the £25,000 and the £4.1 million claims are false and that there is no debt due in truth and reality.
They failed to look into it, because they have been using the court to defraud to do precisely what the authorities are intended to prevent happening; “defeating all his just creditors by allowing judgment to be taken by default or consent”
To summarise the intent of Vos, who failed altogether to deal with any form of relief sought by Mr Millinder whatsoever, at paragraph 129 if his judgment, he said this:
It was never open to Mr Millinder to allege that his companies’ claims, whether in contract or fraud, were open and shut, as he seems to have thought. The windings up of Empowering Wind MFC and Earth Energy were not the product of any conspiracy or fraud as Mr Millinder repeatedly alleges. They were simply the inevitable result of non-payment of established debts, and the failure to take a valid assignment or to enunciate clearly any substantial cross claim in Earth Energy.
In making that statement, Vos knew that no debts could be established and that both winding ups were founded by Staunton’s fraud, just as he knew that the assignment made by Mr Millinder on 29th June 2015 was effectual in law from the date of service. In full knowledge of those circumstances, he said this at paragraph 130 of his judgment:
It is not possible for me, any more than any of the other judges that have considered it, to determine whether Empowering Wind MFC’s non-payment of rent was excused either by misrepresentation, some implied term requiring Middlesbrough to agree a connection agreement or to take ownership of the two sub-stations, or by the force majeure clauses in the Lease and the ESA. Such determinations could only have been made after hearing evidence in a normal CPR Part 7 action.
Vos had before him a request to assign CPR Part 7 claim, which he knew was proven by unlawful forfeiture. Mr Millinder had paid £10,000 for the claim to be heard in conjunction with the application before Vos and the application sought to disclaim the Energy Supply Agreement, because it is an onerous contract and to remove the £4.1 million fraudulent claim, just as it did, to grant remedy for the illegal winding up founded by Staunton’s proven fraud.
Likewise, Vos knew that Nugee had already found that Force Majeure applied in Mr Millinder’s favour, Vos ignored absolutely everything. The rest of the corrupt judges, Snowden, Fancourt, Miles, Murray of the Queen’s Bench, all relied on what Vos covered up as an excuse to continue the fraud, perverting the course of justice to assist the criminals disguised as lawyers.
At paragraph 135 of his judgment, Vos then said this:
It will be apparent from what I have already said that there is no substance in Mr Millinder’s claim that any of the orders of which he complains were vitiated by material non-disclosure by Middlesbrough.
This is because, even assuming in Mr Millinder’s favour that the materials mentioned in his solicitors’ letter dated 11th January 2017 ought to have been disclosed to Arnold J, Mr Millinder and Earth Energy compromised that claim when they agreed to the injunction continuing on 16th January 2017, knowing of the non-disclosure.
Vos was concealing the blatant and proven fraudulent non-disclosure ex-parte that founded the order of 9th January 2017 and the order of 16th January 2017. 172 pages of witness evidence was withheld, undoubtedly the most prevalent case of material non disclosure in the history of UK law. The evidence withheld would have otherwise proven the demand. Any judge knows that a consent order can be set aside if it was made improperly and Vos knew that he one of 16th January 2017 most certainly is. The Penningtons Manches LLP letter proved there was no consent.
On 5th February 2018, at paragraph of his order, Nugee said this of the non disclosure:
“It is now suggested by Mr Millinder on behalf of EEI that the order of 16th January was obtained as a result of material non disclosure before Mr Justice Arnold on the without notice application on the 9th January. He relies for this on non disclosure of a large number of documents which, as I understand it, supported the statutory demand and which explained the background to the dispute, in particular the connection agreement which, in his submissions to me, he explained was the foundation of his argument that the project was, effectively, killed by Middlesbrough”
What both Vos and Nugee were doing was perverting the course of justice, knowing that the offenders had committed multiple and serious frauds.
The indisputable fact is that had the offenders fulfilled their continuing duty to disclose and disclosed that letter, any judge would have discovered the “shopping list of material information” withheld, the significant and obviously deliberate non-disclosure, in combination with the fact that Mr Millinder had not agreed to pay costs and no judge would have continued the order of 16th January 2017 originating the alleged £25,000 anyway, because there was no genuine consent.
The principle is, as set out in Livesey v Jenkins. The House of Lords held that the wife had a duty of full and frank disclosure throughout the proceedings even where an agreement had been reached between the parties but then in the speech of Lord Brandon the problems began. He stated that; “only where the absence of full and frank disclosure had led to the court making an order “substantially different from the order which it would have made if such disclosure had taken place” would a case for setting aside the order could be made good”
In the present case, had the Penningtons Manches LLP letter been disclosed, no judge would have made the order. The position is indisputable, yet Pelling, but later Vos and then Fancourt, certified the proven position as “totally without merit” when it was clear that the non-disclosure of the Penningtons Manches letter was deliberate and with dishonest intent to conceal what was premeditated non-disclosure during the originating ex-parte hearing. These white-collar criminal judges allow fellow criminals to make gains founded by their serious frauds, without fear of retribution. Vos went on to state this (paragraph 139) of his judgment:
“Mr Millinder’s suggestions that the ECRO was an unlawful false instrument and an abuse of process used to conceal fraud and misconduct are, to put the matter plainly, unfounded nonsense”
At paragraph 103, Vos then had the audacity to state this:
I can say at once that I have been through all the papers in this case in meticulous detail, and I have seen no evidence of any kind for any of the allegations of fraud, conspiracy or misdealing that Mr Millinder has made.
Vos made that comment, knowing he has been concealing the multiple frauds that was distinctly pleaded and proven in the skeleton before him.
Gagging orders in the form of civil restraint orders are falsely created and deployed as a form of dishonest concealment – Gross human rights abuse
Once they have finished defrauding, the pattern emerges where the corruptors, the fake judges, then certify the victim’s claims as “totally without merit” with totally no consideration whatsoever. They do so to pave way for deployment of civil restraint orders created by deliberate spoliation of evidence, to conceal the offences and wrongdoings, ensuring continued secrecy, preventing the victim of their abuse from their constitutional right of access to justice, compromising rights to a fair and unbiased trial. The practice is widespread throughout the UK’s corrupt justice system. The law around civil restraint orders is being abused throughout the courts by the judiciary as a way of concealing fraud. That’s precisely what happened in Mr Millinder’s case, because his case is proven.
The Court of Appeal judgment in Wasif v Secretary of State for Home Department 2015 proves categorically that none of Mr Millinder’s applications are totally without merit. It is “ultra vires” for the inferior court to undermine a judgment of the superior court, but yet these lawless oath breaking hoodlums do it anyway, they are a law unto themselves, but they do not administer the law. The Court of Appeal judgment states categorically that:
No judge should certify an application as “totally without merit” unless he or she is: “confident after careful consideration that the case truly is bound to fail. He or she will no doubt have in mind the seriousness of the issue and the consequence of his decision in the particular case.” (per Maurice Kay LJ in Grace).
In the present case, the judges knew that Mr Millinder’s preliminary consideration is proven and it is inextricably linked with the fraudulent claims and the asset, the damages claim that is also proven for the same reasons. They have been abusing the law, certifying applications that are proven as “totally without merit” to conceal fraud, contrary to the decision of the Court of Appeal.
A false instrument ECRO (“Extended Civil Restraint Order”) was made against Mr Millinder by HHJ Pelling QC (right), who is connected with the principal offenders when on 28th June 2018, Pelling evaded all of Mr Millinder’s evidence of fraud and provided himself with false jurisdiction to make one after he certified 3 of Mr Millinder’s applications that were proven beyond doubt as “totally without merit”.
A practice that was then repeated when further corrupt members of the judiciary were deployed by Burnett and Buckland, to continue concealing the fraud.
Buckland went to Durham Hatfield University Law School with Jeremy Robin Bloom, the former senior partner of Womble Bond Dickinson who is also employed by BEIS. Bloom went on to become general in-house legal counsel for Middlesbrough Football Club, the perpetrators of the originating fraud.
Pelling has since been promoted to judge in charge of the London Commercial Court for following his orders. They get promoted and move on up the ranks after following their orders in terrorizing and defrauding their victims.
They provide themselves with false jurisdiction to make the civil restraint orders, allocating fellow corruptors, purporting to be judges to the false instrument, so that the victim has to seek permission from them to make an application in the case. Naturally, that permission is always refused. This is the method used by the corrupt establishment in obstructing the course of justice and providing impunity to the offenders.
It was the role of Vos in the conspiracy, to sustain the false instrument and he had the audacity to publish his judgment in the public domain, whilst the rest of the corruptors relied on it, as an excuse not to do, what was never done. The only motive must have been bribery, both on the part of the corrupt judiciary and Hannon.
It is our belief that Gibson, the driver of this corruption, the Chairman of the Club, paid the judiciary and corrupt central government officials to behave in the way, there is no other logical explanation as to the motive, aside from political corruption, which came in tandem and again, bribery can be the only motive, none of them would have done it for free.
Substantive and proven evidence of multiple frauds – Sir Geoffrey Vos made the conscious and premeditated decision to conceal it
We were shown Mr Millinder’s application of 28th September 2018 . The application requested that the court try the “fraudulent non-disclosure and misrepresentations and to set aside orders founded by a miscarriage of justice and to grant relief appropriately for the malicious “WUPs” (Winding up petitions). That was the primary purpose of the application that was made under the guise of the ECRO fraudulent instrument. Pages 3, 4 and 5 of the application set out the relief sought, with the firs t paragraph of page 1 asking the court to try the frauds and set aside the orders founded by those frauds. Paragraph 3 asked the court to set aside the order of Jones of 26th March 2018, to discharge the fraudulent proof of debt or in the alternative, to disclaim the Energy Supply Agreement as an onerous contract, as it provides only negative liability to the legitimate creditors. Unsurprisingly, Hannon and Jones had failed to do that, because doing so, would have the same effect as removing the £4.1 million fraud by false representation they were using to keep the asset beyond the reach of Mr Millinder and his fellow creditors.
Paragraph 4, asked the court to set aside the winding up order made to defraud Mr Millinder of his assigned investments that are more than 30 times that of the false £25,000 nullity debt, referring also to fraudulent representations on the part of Staunton founding the winding up order and to award damages pursuant to the claim with the application. Paragraph 5 refers to the issue estoppel position, wherein the preliminary consideration contained in the statutory demand of 6th January 2017 is inextricably linked to the false claims and the fact that Mr Millinder’s claim for unlawful forfeiture is proven, reciting part of Nugee J’s judgment of 5th February 2018, through to paragraph 6 of page 4.
Paragraph 6 of page 4, refers to that issue estoppel position whereby it was already tried and proven that Middlesbrough FC unlawfully forfeited the Lease and it was their direct actions in doing so that founded the winding up of Mr Millinder’s sole purpose companies, with their exclusive trading interest in operating and deriving revenue from the sale of electricity produced by the turbine. Paragraph 7 recites the indisputable position that Registrar Jones evaded, to sustain the fraudulent claim against the public interest and the interests of creditors. The highlighted parts prove categorically that the claims made by Middlesbrough FC are all fraudulent and that essentially, Mr Millinder’s claim for unlawful forfeiture is proven. It was that claim, that was made and served on the offenders on 1st November 2018, that was to be heard with the application.
Richard Arnold, who was then sitting as a High Court Judge, allocated to the ECRO, told Mr Millinder he did not have the jurisdiction to hear the application and to make the application to the Chancellor.
On or around 30th September 2018, Vos, having considered the application, provided permission to make it under the ECRO and the application was listed for a hearing on 14th November 2018.
Staunton “U-turned” on the claims he knew were false by his own admission on 9th January 2017
After using the claim, exceeding £4.1 million made by Gill to defraud Mr Millinder, keeping the proven damages claim beyond the reach of creditors, working in collusion with Jones, the white-collar criminal, on 5th October 2018, Jones made Mr Millinder personally liable for £44,536.84 of costs founded by their fraud.
Exactly 38-days later (1 month and 7-days), on 12th November 2018, 2-days prior to the hearing before Vos, Staunton “lost his bottle” and “U-turned” on the claims he, by his own admission knew were false on 9th January 2017. At page 12, paragraph 37 of his skeleton for the hearing before Vos, he said this:
“Para 110 of the ske. The assertion that Rs did something wrong in respect of the wind turbine project is one that may provide a foundation for a claim by Empowering, not A. The para ends with an assertion that “the Defendant” cannot bring any claim against “the Applicant”; this is not understood. 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″
Mr Millinder immediately made Vos aware of this premeditated dishonesty. We were shown an email of 30th November 2018 making Vos fully aware of the admission and listing out the numerous frauds and false statutory documents certified as true when the author, all lawyers, knew the statements they were making were false. As usual, Vos continued concealing the fraud, preventing justice from being served on the offenders.
Vos was invited to comment and to remedy his wrongdoings – But he decided to continue the deceit
In full knowledge of the multiple frauds and the fact that Vos has been dishonest, acting will-ill will to defraud Mr Millinder of his rightful assets under the façade of justice and insolvency, we invited him to comment on these findings and to make an order to remedy his wrongdoings. The response is here:
From: Caton, Andrew (Judicial Office)
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 at 19:35
Subject: RE: MARKED URGENT — Sir Geoffrey Vos – Timing & consolidation – Statutory conspiracy to defraud & perverting the course of justice
Dear Mr Millinder,
I refer to the below and our telephone conversation today.
I have spoken to the Master of the Rolls and I can confirm that he has seen your e-mail.
I can confirm that he is not going to comment or intervene in any way.
Assistant Private Secretary to the Deputy Head of Civil Justice and Assistant Private Secretary to the Master of the Rolls
Judicial Office for England and Wales
The response proves categorically that it is the intent of Vos, as now Master of the Rolls, head of civil justice to defraud Mr Millinder in the name of justice whilst doing absolutely nothing to remedy his wrongdoings, knowing he has defrauded and concealed the fraud.
The UK’s justice system is a sham, run by corrupt dishonest lunatics who act with ill-will. It is proven that those at the very highest echelons are corrupt oath breaking quislings who thrive off defrauding innocent parties. The leadership entirely lack integrity or morals. Quisling abuses of the public’s trust who break their oaths and defraud under the Crown’s brand. This is the reality of the UK’s justice system and now, they seek to deploy an “all proceedings restraint order against Mr Millinder” to further conceal the frauds and obstruct the course of justice.
Vos has today (5th March 2021) been asked to comment on this article and we will publish any comments if they are forthcoming.
If you, or anyone you know has been affected by the issues we address in this article, please get in touch with us, we may be able to help.
Please like, comment and spread far and wide on social media.