UK Corruption: Exclusive report:
After 1,323 days of deprival of access to a fair trial, other times of any trial whatsoever and whilst the corrupt UK state coerced the judiciary to provide impunity to fellow Conservative Party corruptors, another unfair and unreasoned judgment is handed down to conceal blatant fraud and acts of corruption.
We, the British people have the inalienable right to be governed justly according to the rule of the laws of the United Kingdom. This case proves very clearly, that under Johnson’s vile kleptocracy, a sect of colluding white-collar criminals in ministerial and judicial office, that doesn’t happen.
“Not only must justice be done, it must also be seen to be done”
That is the maxim, but here, it is seen and proven not to have been done. The UK’s courts are 100% rotten to the core, they are controlled by the political establishment of liars and cheats, who provide impunity to fellow liars and cheats. Those they control have also become liars and cheats, who cheat justice and the rule of law.
In December last year, even the Lord Chief Justice, Burnett himself, was forced to admit that:
Political interference is the driver in this case. It’s all about preventing justice being served on Steve Gibson, the owner of Middlesbrough FC because he is a Teesside Conservative Politician, whilst also providing impunity to his lawyers, Womble Bond Dickinson, because they are employed by BEIS and the Insolvency Service. The issue is, they have all committed fraud and other offences.
In the case of the Attorney General v Millinder 2021 , an all proceedings restraint order was made against Mr Millinder our CEO, attempting to prevent him from his constitutional right of access to justice, because his case is proven and the corrupt state did not want the perpetrators to be prosecuted.
In reality, the order and judgment is, in itself a fraud, a legal fiction designed only to pervert the course of justice. Fraud on top of fraud with judicial fraud to top it off.
The Law Society Gazette, who appear to actively support the corrupt State by defaming victims of similar abuse without inviting them for comment, were very quick to jump on the bandwagon, with an article titled ‘Incorrigible’ vexatious litigant barred from every court
The article was written by the somewhat immoral journalist, Michael Cross who appears to spread fake news to assist the establishment in their campaign of malice and gross human rights abuse, without researching the facts whatsoever.
On 15th June 2012, Mr Millinder competed an option to lease an area of the overflow carpark at Middlesbrough Football Club’s Riverside Stadium. The project was to be “Europe’s first wind powered football stadium”.
Mr Millinder was to construct and operate a £3.5 million, 136-metre-high wind turbine, making the stadium completely sustainable in terms of energy supply.
Electricity generated by the turbine was to be delivered to the stadium infrastructure via a private 11Kv network that was to be owned by the Club. The turbine was to connect into their private network.
The option agreement provided a license for Mr Millinder’s company, Empowering Wind MFC Ltd, the sole purpose vehicle from which to construct, connect to the grid and operate the turbine.
It was stipulated by Northern Powergrid, the Distribution Network Operator that for the turbine to connect to the grid, the Club must take ownership of their substations, forming the private 11Kv network that the turbine could connect into.
After the connection configuration was finalised during the option period, on 17th June 2013 Mr Millinder exercised the option agreement and competed the lease.
After the project suffered a delay, constituting Force Majeure in accordance with the contracts, the Club sought to altogether evade the terms of the contracts they completed, demanding payment that was not owed.
In April 2015, the Club “U-turned” on the connection configuration it had agreed during the option period, when it was an option for any of the parties, to negate if either became dissatisfied with the commercial or technical arrangements being proposed. That did not happen, on the contrary, the Club extended the option agreement so that Mr Millinder could complete the same and only connection, requiring them to take ownership of their substations to form the private network.
After taking £200,000 from Mr Millinder for the Lease, after the connection configuration had been agreed and completed from October 2012 through until January 2013, the Club refused to do as required in establishing the connection, rendering the project useless, leaving Mr Millinder with huge losses in developing the project, only to result in no connection.
Just as the Club refused the connection, denying Mr Millinder his rights to do as granted, the corrupt courts denied his right of access to justice and to any remedy for the serious wrongdoings.
The conduct of the courts in this case clearly demonstrates that no developer in the UK is safe, for one cannot rely on the terms of an option agreement or subsequent contracts to gain restitution.
The conduct affronts the supremacy of the rule of law itself and demonstrates that creditors cannot rely on the Insolvency Act 1986 or the Insolvency Rules 2016 to gain restitution by recovering assets of insolvent or alleged insolvent estates.
Rather, the corrupt political establishment and the courts they control, have weaponised justice and the law into the means of defrauding creditors, whilst preventing justice being served on the perpetrators.
The Insolvency Service, rotten to the core with corrupt practices, was a major advocate of the fraud, assisting Womble Bond Dickinson, the Club’s lawyers in using false representation proofs of debt to defraud Mr Millinder to ensure that the asset, the proven damages claim, was kept beyond reach of creditors.
The low down
Essentially, what happened is that Middlesbrough FC prevented Mr Millinder from performing on the rights granted by the contracts they completed, then demanded money from Mr Millinder that was not owed, after they prevented him from performing by refusing the connection for the turbine.
The Club refused the connection which formed the entire basis and understanding upon which Mr Millinder completed the Lease in the first instance. They all knew, without a connection, the turbine cannot operate.
It really is that simple. So why, we ask did Mr Millinder land up with these restraint orders?
It was a cover up, concealment of fraud and corruption by the rogue State and a justice system that is vile, unfair and unfit for purpose.
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio (“from a dishonorable cause an action does not arise”) is a legal doctrine denoting that a plaintiff will be unable to pursue legal relief and damages if it arises in connection with their own tortious act.
It is proven that the Club unlawfully forfeited the Lease after preventing the Tenant from performing on the rights granted.
The corrupt UK courts assisted the offenders in evading justice, whilst concealing proven and blatant fraud.
Essentially, all the judges in this case acted with “favour and ill-will” to deprive Mr Millinder of his rights in law. They perverted the course of justice and then accused Mr Millinder of “attempting to pervert the course of justice” and “contempt of court” for sending an email to the Judge that proved that Judge Fanning in the Magistrates Court has perverted the course of justice.
We evaluate the contents of that email later into this article.
The Court consistently denied Mr Millinder justice, cheating and often misrepresenting the law whilst evading all Mr Millinder’s evidence that proved the case.
Acting under instruction of corrupt Tory politicians who are connected with Steve Gibson, the Conservative Teesside politician who owns Middlesbrough FC, the façade of insolvency was used to defraud.
Civil restraint orders, then this “all proceedings restraint order” were deployed to deprive Mr Millinder of his right of access to justice after his right to any trial whatsoever was denied from the outset.
On 6th November 2020, just one month before Michael Ellis QC, the corrupt Tory Attorney General made his application for the “all proceedings restraint order”, Mr Justice Fancourt was forced to admit in the open court that:
“the underlying substantive issues have never in fact been tried”
In relation to the assignment that underpinned both indisputable debts of the statutory demand, on 6th November 2020 Fancourt said this:
“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 knew, just as all the rest of the colluding judges did, that statutory law makes the assignment effectual from the date notice of assignment was given.
On 11th April 2018 Staunton, the Club’s barrister admitted that Mr Millinder’s cross claim extinguished the liability to pay £25,000
Moreover however, the Club’s own barrister had admitted on 11th April 2018 that:
MR STAUNTON: “and paras.17 to 24. So there’s a cross claim which extinguishes the liability to pay £25,000”
Fancourt knew, just as the rest of these oath breaking judges, who behaved as if they were one of the offenders, that it was already tried and found by Nugee J on 5th February 2018, that the claim, founding the demand, but also the claim, originated by unlawful forfeiture of the Lease is proven.
The 5th February 2018 judgment
Paragraph 3 of the order:
“…in effect, all Middlesbrough’s fault for failing to enter into an agreement called the connection agreement. The upshot of that was that EW was unable to generate any money, that meant it was neither able to pay rent under the lease, nor to pay what were quite substantial charges ostensibly payable under something called the energy supply agreement“
Paragraph 4 of the order:
“on the basis of those matters Middlesbrough demanded payment of money from EW, terminated the Lease for non payment and subsequently appeared as a supporting creditor”
Issue estoppel applies to the finding, but that did not stop them certifying the case that is proven as “totally without merit”, meaning no more or less than bound to fail. It was however, ultra vires for any judge of the High Court to rule to the contrary of the finding, proving Mr Millinder’s case.
Fancourt was lying, for he knew that the substantive issue had been tried and found in Mr Millinder’s favour.
How is a case that is proven, no more or less than bound to fail we ask?
The fact of the matter is that the sum of the demand, cannot be disputed. It could not be disputed or defended the first time around, so on 9th January 2017 the Club and their conspirers, Womble Bond Dickinson fraudulently withheld 172-pages of witness evidence from their (without notice) injunction proceeding instead. Nugee prevented them from being prosecuted, whilst himself committing fraud and misrepresenting the terms of the assignment.
On 5th February 2018 Nugee J committed fraud and falsely represented the assignment he had before him in his order
Here is the original assignment terms, an absolute assignment of all the investment made in the project:
Nugee, who had the exact terms of the assignment before him, falsely represented its terms within his order of 5th February 2018:
Robin Bloom lied about the assignment in his ex-parte witness statement when it is proven he had the assignment in his possession 3 times over
Aside from that, on 3rd January 2017, Mr Millinder had once again served the same assignment that was served on the Club on 30th June 2015, again with the demand by email to Bloom:
Bloom however, lied in his witness statement, knowing that the statement he made was blatantly false, as clearly evidenced herein and he said this:
Bloom lied and said he saw no evidence of the assignment, because he had the conscious and premeditated intent to lie in his witness statement whilst withholding the statement at the same time. Once again, the corrupt judiciary just concealed the fraud and perjury.
There is a false witness statement ex-parte by Bloom, the purported solicitor, that is proven to be false, fraudulent non-disclosure of 172-pages of witness evidence that Nugee had found to have otherwise proven the demand, the false representations; £256,269.89, £541,308.89 and over £4.1 million, then the applications to Bristol County Court certified as true when they were false and still, the corrupt judiciary and the Attorney General’s Office conceal the fraud whilst providing the offenders impunity.
On 23rd October 2020, the Club and their conspirers did precisely the same again, this time Fancourt came to their aid, preventing justice from being served, defrauding Mr Millinder of over £1.17 million and sustaining the injunction that was founded by fraud, knowing the sum of the demand cannot be disputed. Fancourt certified Mr Millinder’s application for trial as “totally without merit” when the case is proven, after first admitting that he did not access any single part of Mr Millinder’s evidence. It was another case of bias by predetermination and perversion of the course of justice.
Amongst the 13 material exhibits withheld from their ex-parte (without notice) injunction application on 23rd October 2020, was, unsurprisingly, the transcript and order of that hearing of 5th February 2018 that proved it had already been found that the claim of the demand cannot be disputed, along with the assignment of the investments Mr Millinder made in the project.
There was an exact replication of the fraud committed the first time around, but still the corrupt judiciary prevented justice being served on them.
The two issues underpinning the £1.17 million statutory demand
Fancourt J: You say at the very least there is a substantial dispute about the underlying debt.
Mr Ohrenstein: Yes.
Fancourt J: I understand.
Mr Ohrenstein: The underlying debt and, and the, and the alleged assignments, and that is the very low threshold we have to reach.
Why, we ask, did Fancourt therefore continue the injunction?
The transcript of the proceeding reveals all, he was working for Middlesbrough FC to prevent justice being served on them. Don’t take our word for it, read the transcript and make up your own mind.
The contractual documents
Lease: The Lease provided for 12-months free of rent from which to commission the wind turbine.
Any agreement by Mr Millinder to supply power was conditional upon:
Satisfaction in full of the following conditions:
1. The Generator (Mr Millinder’s company) entering into a connection agreement with Northern Powergrid.
2. Commissioning of the wind turbine.
The date on which those conditions are fulfilled is the “Start Date”.
The Connection Agreement: Comprising of;
A. The Connection Offer – Conditional upon Middlesbrough FC taking ownership of its 11Kv substations so that the turbine could connect into their private 11Kv network.
B. The Connection Deed – To ensure that Middlesbrough FC maintained the connection from their “customer owned” substations to the turbine for the lifetime of the Lease.
C. The Northern Powergrid and Middlesbrough FC agreement for transfer of ownership and sale of the substations in the nominal consideration of £1 which the Club refused to sign, rendering the project useless.
It was, unsurprisingly, all of that material information that was withheld from the ex-parte hearing of 9th January 2017, but in any event, even though the case is proven and the sum of the demand cannot be disputed, the corrupt judiciary still certified as “totally without merit” (no more or less than bound to fail).
The truth and reality is that they did so, solely to prevent justice being served on the offenders, to originate fraudulent civil restraint orders to conceal their own heinous abuse and fraud, along with the principal frauds committed by the offenders.
The terms of the completed contracts cannot be diminished, but the terms were concealed and evaded UK justice system is governed by colluding white-collar criminals
It’s a case of “justice subject to status”. looking out for one’s fellow brethren comes first. It is no coincidence that all the judges in Mr Millinder’s case, along with Buckland, Burnett and Ellis QC MP are all colluding freemasons who have sought to actively protect Jeremy Robin Bloom, a fellow colluding freemason, former senior partner of Womble Bond Dickinson and now general legal counsel of Middlesbrough FC, from prosecution.
It is Buckland, the now Lord Chancellor, who has been coercing the judiciary to provide impunity to his personal associate, Jeremy Robin Bloom, since October 2017 when Mr Millinder reported Bloom to the Attorney General’s Office for civil contempt, who has originated all this corruption, yet it is he, who is sworn into office to maintain the independence of the judiciary. Of course, when dishonest colluding offenders run the justice system, nobody is going to get justice. That is the problem, along with the fact that most of the judges are only too willing to take the orders.
Lady Justice Andrews and Mr Justice Swift were perverting the course of justice by concealing evidence of corruption
When Mr Millinder put that before the Judge, sending an email of 24th May 2021 to Her Ladyship directly, she accused Mr Millinder of “an attempt to pervert the course of justice” and “contempt of court” in knowledge that the email sent, proves that Fanning has been perverting the course of justice.
The hypocrisy is out of control, when they have been perverting the course of justice from the outset, acting under orders to do so by the Attorney General’s Office and Buckland himself.
The email contained a recording of 16th November 2018 between Mr Millinder and York Magistrates, where the Court explained that Mr Millinder’s prosecution had been “transferred out of circuit” by “someone much higher up than this court”. It was later discovered that Buckland’s office arranged the transfer out to prevent justice being served on Hannon and Staunton. They put it before Fanning so that he could dispose of the prosecution (perverting the course of justice).
The same email contained tab_AA, an exhibit proving that Buckland had known of the fraud since October 2017, but he has been concealing. Page 7 – 13 contained the detailed letter setting out the fraud to Buckland himself. Page 14 – 17 contains the evasive responses and lame excuses for Buckland failing to prosecute his personal associate, Bloom for the proven civil contempt and fraud he has committed.
The letter dated 14th November 2017 bears a seal of 16th November 2017 in the application that was expressly “to be heard by a High Court Judge” that was circumvented by Registrar Jones who said “for my purposes, dishonesty is not going to matter, I can’t judge” . Clearly the instruction came from the Attorney General’s Office to Briggs, the Chief Registrar who sits on the Attorney General’s A Panel.
Tab_AA, contained in the email Mr Millinder wanted to draw attention of the judge to, at page 3, exhibited a series of email tracking returns, coming back as “not read” and dated 17th October 2019. It was one day after Mr Millinder threatened to prosecute Judge Fanning of Kirklees Magistrates Court, that the court frantically deleted the emails from the court file.
The hearing of the orchestrated transfer out of York Magistrates Court was on 22nd November 2018 and the emails deleted, all five of them, contained the evidence Mr Millinder relied on for the hearing. It is proven therefore that none of those emails were ever even opened by anyone in the Court, for if they were, the returns would not have come back as “not read” on 17th October 2019. Andrews and Swift were concealing the fact that all the judges in this case have perverted the course of justice, acting under orders of Buckland and the Attorney General’s Office to do so. The orders made by Fanning were a case of bias by pre-determination, yet Swift and Andrews relied so heavily on them to make their void all proceedings restraint order.
It was said that: “District Judge Fanning refused the application. In the course of his decision he noted that Mr Millinder had failed to disclose the existence of the 2018 ECRO; he described the application as “nothing other than a collateral attack against the civil litigation process”. At paragraph 11 of his decision District Judge Fanning said this:
“Even though I am satisfied that the proposed prosecution falls at the first hurdle [on the facts, no evidence of dishonesty], if I am wrong about that I have no doubt that the sole motive in pursuing proceedings in the criminal courts has nothing whatsoever to do with protecting the public interest, and everything to do with attempting to right a civil wrong (as he sees it) by pursuing two individuals against whom Mr Millinder has a fixated and (given the findings to date of the High Court) unjustified malevolence. He is precluded from pursuing them in the civil courts as a result of the ECRO and so he chooses to pursue them in the criminal courts. That is to misuse the criminal process – especially where there is (on my assessment) no prima facia criminal case. If his application to have the ECRO set aside succeeds, then he can seek to use the civil courts to adjudicate on what is a civil dispute.”
It is however proven herein that Staunton has committed an indictable only offence, namely section 5 of the Perjury Act 1911 and fraud by false representation. Likewise, we saw incontrovertible evidence that Hannon has also. Evidence that we adduce in the next section of this article.
Likewise, it is proven that Fanning did not even read any single part of Mr Millinder’s submissions or evidence, because the emails containing the submissions were deleted without being read on 17th October 2019. If he had read them, it would have been proven that Mr Millinder’s criminal case against the defendants was proven and that full disclosure was made.
What use is a Law Minister or a judge that conceals fraud we ask? A question we ask again below in relation to Ellis.
This compelling report raises many questions, but the material facts are so simple; anyone could determine the case
Our article reveals that in the UK, no business or individual is safe, for one cannot rely on the terms of a completed contract, nor the laws to get justice. A case of “justice subject to status”, not what you know, but who you are affiliated with.
The UK’s courts and judges are politically controlled, independence is non-existent. The judges are the executioners, working for the corrupt Tory establishment.
Justice and the law has been weaponised to defraud, whilst providing impunity to fellow corruptors.
The restraint order and the subsequent order made, are void as ultra vires, for it is beyond the powers of any judge to make any order or judgment that prevents justice from being served. That was their intention, to conceal their own fraud and human rights abuse with a restraint order in knowledge that the judge allocated to it will consistently refuse any application made.
The defendants, Middlesbrough FC, the Official Receiver of London and the corrupt lawyers acting for them, Womble Bond Dickinson, could not defend Mr Millinder’s claim, so the Attorney General, Michael Ellis QC came to their aid, preventing justice being served with his “all proceedings restraint order”.
What use is a Law Minister and head of the Crown Prosecution Service who conceals fraud and criminal offences we ask?
We evidence Submission_AGO_04_02_2021, a particularly telling piece of evidence that demonstrates that the corrupt Attorney General’s Office have been concealing the fraud, acting under the instruction of Buckland, the now Lord Chancellor.
The email was read 459 times by Mr Charania, the Director General of the Attorney General’s Office, between 16th January 2021 and 3rd February. The questions however, remain unanswered. They have been concealing indictable offences and the court has been following their orders to do the same. The
The now “Master of the Rolls” head of UK civil justice concealed the fraud, the rest followed in his footsteps
Geoffrey Vos, who is now Master of the Rolls, concealed the blatant and proven fraud, whilst Justices Murray, Fancourt, Snowden, Miles and then Swift and Lady Justice Andrews in the Administrative Court followed on. All have used false instruments to conceal fraud committed by the corrupt judiciary, who concealed fraud by the corrupt offenders.
At paragraph 19 of his judgment, which we see clearly as nothing other than a perversion of the course of justice, Vos said this:
“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 had the judgment of Nugee of 5th February 2018 in his possession, he knew that it was found on 5th February 2018 that neither rent or energy supply was owed.
At paragraph 109 of his judgment, Vos lied again to conceal the proven fraud and stated this:
“Middlesbrough invoiced Empowering Wind MFC for a quantified claim for rent in the sum of £256,269.89″
They are undignified liars and cheats and this one sits as the head of civil justice. If this is what the head, second highest judge of the land is willing to do, what are the rest of them up to? The answers are revealed in that “all proceedings restraint order”, which we will be reporting on in the next article.
Vos however, had the application to try the proven fraud in his possession, but he failed altogether, he just wanted to retain the fraudulent ECRO “Extended Civil Restraint Order” founded by another colluding white-collar criminal purported judge, HHJ Pelling, (Philip Mark Pelling), who has some protracted “form” for similar abuse.
The application notice of 28th September 2018 that was before Vos cited specifically that Nugee had already found that neither rent or energy supply was owed. Page 3, paragraph 5 refers to it precisely. Page 4, paragraph 7 refers to the claim exceeding £4.1 million which Mr Millinder asked the court to remove, but Vos concealed the fraud altogether. Is that a “quantified claim for rent also”?
Paragraph, through to the end of the application continuation sheet does in fact prove categorically that the claim is false. Why we ask, does the court sustain fraudulent claims against creditors?
Vos, and the rest of these so called judges, were taken to the categoric proof by Staunton himself when in the note of hearing ex-parte (without notice) he himself admitted that “for the purpose of the Energy Supply Agreement, Force Majeure has effect”, but he lied about the operative provision of Force Majeure in the Lease, because he knew it had effect for the same reason.
On 5th February 2018, Nugee found that Staunton lied about the Force Majeure provision in the Lease, but he concealed that, just as he then went on to conceal the fact that the Energy Supply Agreement is conditional and that they all knew, from 9th January 2017 as the longstop, that neither rent or energy supply was owed. Vos knew that £181,269.89 of the fraudulent claim he described as a “quantified claim for rent” was an invoice for energy supply, which the Club was contractually prohibited from making.
Vos also knew that no rent was ever payable, because even if the Club did not unlawfully forfeit the Lease based on their unwarranted demand in the sum of £256,269.89, the first installment of rent (£15,000) was not payable until 15th September 2018. The Club unlawfully forfeited on 19th August 2018.
The £4.1 million claim was sustained by Hannon, the corrupt Official Receiver, because he was preventing Mr Millinder from his democratic right to call a meeting to replace Hannon with a liquidator that was not defrauding creditors.
Blatant and audacious fraud by the principal offenders and judges that supported them
Womble Bond Dickinson made the fraudulent claim, 24-days after their own instructed counsel, Staunton, admitted, on 9th January 2017 that no claims could be established by virtue of “Force Majeure”, notwithstanding the fact that any “invoicing and payment” was contractually prohibited and that there was no “Entitlement to agreed output” (agreement by Mr Millinder to supply power). These criminals, purporting to be judges, all knew that £181,269.89 of the unwarranted demand used to unlawfully forfeit the Lease that required the turbine to be capable of commercial operation, was blatantly false. They perverted the course of justice.
On 12th November 2018, at page 12 of his skeleton, Staunton “U-turned” on the claims he knew, by his own written admission could not be established on 9th January 2017.
Between 14th November 2018 and 4th December 2018, Vos, who was made abundantly well aware of Staunton’s “U-turn on the claims”, asked Staunton to retract and replace his skeleton, less the admission that they “U-turned”, stating “R’s (meaning “Respondents”) don’t bring any claims against A (meaning Applicant, Mr Millinder), Empowering (Empowering Wind MFC Ltd) or Earth Energy (Earth Energy Investments LLP), save that R’s claim for £25,000 under the consent order.
We evidence at the bottom of page 1, here, that Mr Millinder made Vos acutely aware of Staunton’s admissions on 30th November 2018.
On 5th February 2018, Staunton admitted that the assignment is valid by stating (from the transcript of the hearing): “What’s assigned are the investments, the £200,000”
Shortly after finding that the claim is proven and the assignment is valid, that was when Nugee committed fraud and misrepresented the terms of the assignment to make his corrupted version not absolute, so he could rely on that version in his order to defraud Mr Millinder. He did so, because any judge would know that any absolute assignment, of which notice has been given, is effectual in law, section 136(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925 makes it so.
On 21st March 2018, Nugee made an order, after dismissing the Club and Womble Bond Dickinson’s application to strike out Mr Millinder’s application of 1st March 2018 to set aside the purported consent order, listing Mr Millinder’s application for a hearing in the usual way.
Exactly one week later, on 28th March 2018 Staunton appeared, to wind up Mr Millinder’s company, Earth Energy for the £25k that was subject to challenge by virtue of Nugee’s order when they all knew, on 5th February 2018 but in fact long prior, that the assigned investments extinguished the alleged £25k debt by 26.6 times as of 5th February 2018.
We refer to the transcript of that hearing on 28th March 2018 in Mr Millinder’s absence, where Staunton committed more fraud and lied about the assignment he himself admitted was assigned on 5th February 2018, just 51-days prior, in the open court.
At page 3 of the transcript, we evidence where Staunton lied about the order of 21st March 2018, because he knew that the purported debt, he himself admitted was extinguished by the assigned investments, was subject to challenge. Anyone would know, that an alleged debt that is subject to challenge, is not and cannot be a petition debt. The alleged debt, that is subject to challenge is indisputably disputed on genuine and substantial grounds:
JUDGE BARBER: — saying in his email that the – the petition is disputed.
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.
On 28th March 2018 Staunton then lied to the Court about the cross claim
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.
MR STAUNTON: That is the cross-claim.
JUDGE BARBER: Well, it’s not a cross-claim though, is it?
MR STAUNTON: Well, I – in my submission, no, however, the company – the subsidiary then goes into liquidation and Mr Hammond’s the OR. Mr Hammond’s filed a report that the subsidiary has no assets, so he cannot investigate the claim that Mr Millinder says the subsidiary has against Middlesbrough.
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.
Above, Staunton was referring to the originating application (the first application made by Mr Millinder) for the court to remove the fraudulent £4.1 million claim that Staunton has known to be false since 9th January 2017.
On 11th April 2018 Staunton lied to Court about the assignment
On 11th April 2018, which was the application by Mr Millinder to rescind the malicious, illegal winding up order of 28th March 2018 founded by Staunton’s fraud, Chief Registrar Briggs, the lying cheating corrupt Insolvency Registrar who was conflicted anyway, denied remedy for the proven malicious winding up petition and concealed Staunton’s fraud. The corrupt establishment then factored in Pelling to make the false instrument ECRO to conceal their own fraud and the fraud of their co-conspirers.
On 11th April 2018, Staunton’s tact changed completely:
From the transcript of the hearing before Briggs on 11th April we quote:
MR STAUNTON: That’s an exact quote by Mr Justice Nugee of the resolution
Staunton knew that Nugee had committed fraud and misrepresented the terms of the assignment in his judgment to make it not absolute, so Staunton lied and told Briggs that Nugee’s fraud by false representation was an “exact quote of the resolution” when he knew it was not. That is clear and obvious dishonesty, on top of the fraud he had already committed.
MR STAUNTON: “and paras.17 to 24. So there’s a cross claim which extinguishes the liability to pay £25,000”
After Staunton himself admitted that “what’s assigned are the investments” on 5th February 2018, just 4-days prior to Gill of Womble Bond Dickinson presenting the without notice petition for £25,000, Staunton himself admits that the cross claim extinguished the liability to pay the £25,000, when it is evidenced he knew that on 5th February 2018.
It is clearly evidenced above however that on 28th March 2018, before Barber, he lied about the cross claim and said it was “disposed of Monday this week”, as well as lying about the order of 21st March 2018.
MR STAUNTON: and if you look at the second page, it’s the 21st March, and this is before Judge Barber
It is clear and obvious that Staunton had lied about the order of 21st March 2018, knowing that he also lied about it and said “that matter has been fully ventilated in front of Judge Jones, terminating Monday of this week” on 28th March 2018, just 14-days prior.
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“
It is proven for all to see, all that was before Judge Barber was Staunton’s lies. He lied about the cross claim and he lied about the assignment, as well as the order of 21st March 2018, but the corrupt UK judiciary assist the offenders by concealing proven fraud and dishonesty that amounts to indictable offences of fraud and perjury.
These criminals, purporting to be judges, defeat the rule of law itself, the laws of the United Kingdom that they are paid, by you, the taxpayer to administer.
It was Vos, the former Chancellor of the High Court who has been concealing this blatant fraud, whilst using false instrument restraint orders to effectually pervert the course of justice, whilst depriving Mr Millinder of his rights in law.
The corruptors in the Administrative Court, Mr Justice Swift and Lady Justice Andrews, undoubtedly following their orders, did precisely the same, a “copy and paste job” of the same corrupted mala fide orders to form yet another.
We were shown the order that came with the “all proceedings restraint order” where a “penal notice” was made threatening Mr Millinder with contempt of court because he sought to get justice in a system that prevents justice being served. The application to try the fraud and criminal offences was once again suppressed by a void GCRO, founded by a without jurisdiction, ultra vires act by a judicial office holder.
In absence of determination of the application by Mr Millinder which was issued on 10th November 2020, it was ultra-vires (beyond one’s powers) to have continued presiding over the case.
On 11th November 2020, Fancourt continued to preside over the case, because he was part of the fraud, as only too clearly evidenced, whilst he too prevented justice being served on the offenders, knowing that once again they had fraudulently withheld all the evidence that proved Mr Millinder’s demand against them for £1.17 million.
The GCRO referred to at paragraph 8 of their false instrument all proceedings restraint order, which has been founded by their own fraud upon the court, is indisputably void, but it is evidenced that the Administrative Court seek to lend credence to a void order, using that to once again suppress Mr Millinder’s right to have the fraud and offences that have been consistently concealed, tried. The order , paragraph 5, dismisses the application for trial, when they knew, only too well that Fancourt himself admitted that none of the “substantive issues” had ever been tried. They are all guilty of gross human rights violations.
At paragraph 7 of the judgment, they have the brazen audacity to recite paragraph 103 of the February 2019 judgment by Vos:
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. He has made these allegations when he became frustrated by his seeming inability to find a forum in which he would vindicate what he saw as his companies’ irrebuttable claims. He should not have done so, nor should he have threatened any of these professionals or public servants as he has sought to do.
The evidence of fraud that was before the Court was evaded and concealed by the corrupt judiciary
We were shown Mr Millinder’s skeleton for the hearing that Vos adjourned of 14th November 2018, in fact, the fraud was distinctly pleaded and proven, aside from the obvious fact that Nugee himself had found that the claims were false. Page 9, paragraph 48 identified clearly that Registrar Jones had no jurisdiction to hear the application and that by Jones’s own admission he did not have jurisdiction:
“I cannot Judge” and “I cannot get involved in Mr Justice Arnold’s case, he’s up there I am down here”
Jones never had jurisdiction to hear any part of Mr Millinder’s application that sought to try the multiple frauds that have been concealed by the shockingly corrupt judiciary, but he affixed himself to the application anyway, to dispose of it, to conceal the fraud, whilst certifying the application to recuse him as “totally without merit”. It was that application which was amongst the 3 that Pelling relied on to establish the ECRO (Extended Civil Restraint Order), when Mr Millinder’s case is proven in its entirety.
Page 9 of that skeleton, paragraph 52 through to 68 clearly proved that the £4.1 million claim is false, but Vos again concealed it and between 30th March 2021 and 6th July 2021 Swift and Andrews did precisely the same.
Page 12, paragraph 70 through to 85 evidenced the fraud and perjury committed by Staunton and the fact that Briggs was conflicted, again, Vos concealed it all. It was precisely the same fraud that Mr Millinder put before Andrews and Swift, likewise, they concealed it, but they all knew, nothing has ever been tried.
We have proven beyond doubt that the UK’s courts are 100% corrupt and are unfit for purpose. The judges have acted to conceal fraud and to prevent justice being served on Middlesbrough FC and their conspirers, whilst themselves committing fraud and then seeking to conceal their wrongdoings with false instrument restraint orders to deprive their victims of the right of access to justice.
This is the lawless insanity and lengths these corruptors are willing to go to prevent justice being served on criminal racketeers who use the courts to defraud.
We invited Andrews LJ, Swift J and the Law Society to comment on this article and the evidence presented.
In our next article, we will provide detailed evaluation and report on the mala fide all proceedings restraint order, explaining how the corrupt judiciary have violated and contradicted the laws, in particular insolvency case law that it is not res judicata to set aside any judgment, if there is not a debt due in truth and reality.