Defendant Notice of Motion

15th October 2006 Notice of Motion for Discovery - Filed in court & served on plaintiff (they ignored it)
12th November 2006 Notice to produce
12th November 2006 Notice to Join Galilee Solicitors
12th November 2006 Notice to Join Macquarie Mortgages
28th November 2006 Notice of Motion for Stay on writ
28th November 2006 Notice of Motion to Revoke the writ
5th December 2006 Notice of Motion for Stay on writ
14th December 2006 Notice of Motion for Stay on writ
21st December 2006 Notice of Motion for Stay on interlocutory “JUDGMENT/ORDER” for writ of
possessiont and to revoke it

Defendant Defence

Fiona Cristian's Defence

Form 6 (version 3)
Rule 14.3
DEFENCE
COURT DETAILS

Court Supreme Court of New South Wales

Division Common Law

List Possession

Registry Sydney

Case number 13403/06

TITLE OF PROCEEDINGS

Plaintiff Perpetual Limited, formerly known as
Perpetual Trustees Australia Limited [ACN 000 431 827]

Defendant Fiona Caroline Cristian

FILING DETAILS / ADDRESS FOR SERVICE

Filed for Fiona Caroline Cristian Defendant

Address for service PO Box 1320 Bowral NSW 2576

Telephone 0418-203204

Email a...@theelements.cc

PLEADINGS AND PARTICULARS
The defendant relies on the following facts and assertions
1. The defendant denies the plaintiff is entitled to the relief claimed in paragraph 1 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) of the statement of claim.
2. The defendant does not know and cannot admit the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the statement of claim.
3. The defendant admits paragraphs 3, 4 of the statement of claim.
4. The defendant rejects paragraph 5 of the statement of claim.
5. The defendant does not know and cannot admit the allegations contained in paragraph 6 of the statement of claim.
6. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 of the statement of claim.
7. The defendant admits that the defendant made no payments, the defendant otherwise rejects the allegations contained in paragraph 17 of the statement of claim.
8. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 of the statement of claim.

SIGNATURE

Signature ……………………………………………….

Name Fiona Caroline Cristian

Capacity Defendant

Date 15 September 2006

AFFIDAVIT VERIFYING.

Name Fiona Caroline Cristian

Address PO Box 1320 Bowral NSW 2576

Occupation Home duties

On 15 September 2006 I say on oath

1. I am the Defendant
2. I believe that the allegations of fact contained in this defence are true.
3. I believe that the allegations of fact that are denied in this defence are untrue.
4. After reasonable inquiry, I do not know whether or not the allegations of fact that are not admitted in this defence are true.

Sworn at Bowral New South Wales

Signature of deponent ……………………………………….

Signature of witness ………………………………………….

Name of witness ……………………………………………….

Capacity of witness ……………………………………………

Address of witness …………………………………………………………………
PARTY DETAILS

Parties to proceedings

PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT

Perpetual Limited, formerly Fiona Caroline Cristian
known as Perpetual Trustees
Australia Limited.

FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT DEFENDANT FILING THE DEFENCE

Defendant Cristian

Given names Fiona Caroline

Address PO Box 1320 Bowral NSW 2576

Telephone 0418 203204

Email a...@theelements.cc

Defendant Cross Claim

First Cross Claim for Fiona Caroline Cristian 30th October 2005.
Amended Cross Claim for Fiona Caroline Cristian 30th October 2005

Defendant Affidavits

Arthur Cristian's First Affidavit
Supporting Fiona Cristian's First Cross Claim

Defendant Exhibits

All Macquarie Mortgages (MM) Approval Documents for Macquarie Executive Choice Line of Credit
Note: Two MM approvals were mailed on the same day 22nd August 2005 as the MM Loan contract. We received them all together on the 25th August 2005 and we signed the loan contract same day. All documents were created by James Angus, a man with two hats, one with Perpetual Limited and one with MM. James Angus, if he exists (computer signatures), is the man responsible for the fraud.

Copy of contract provided as well. See AS1.
When we signed the loan contract we were not aware of the different internal MM product names - terminologies given to each product. MM never gave us any brochures explaining-detailing the name of each product and how each product works. The signed loan contract does not mention anything about how the product we signed for, actually works. What actually is it. We were only thinking on the lines of a line of credit and not a principal & interest or a interest only product. The writing Macquarie Mortgages Home Loan did not alarm us that the contract we were signing was for a very different product in the way it works.

Copy of Macquarie Brochures for A) Macquarie Executive Choice line of credit B) Macquarie Mortgage Saver home Loan - Also includes a Macquarie Mortgages internal memo/news flash 21 Dated 15th July 2005 & effective Monday 18th July 2005. It was sent to all staff agents/brokers announcing changes to the Mortgage Saver and most importantly to the Macquarie Executive Choice line of credit product.

Copy of facsimile from MM broker John Hartney to MM requesting the MM Executive Choice Line Of Credit.

7th Affidavit containing The Credit River Case - A legal precedent in law proving banks will and do create money out of thin air.

Caveat filed on Land Titles office 31st May 2007

Letter from bank solicitors 4th June 2007 in response to the caveat we filed

Defendant Submissions to the Court

Fiona Cristian - Submission To The Court
This is a very large document so we split it into sepparate attachments.
Document List Contained In This Submission (see attachments below)

1. Document List - Submission to the Court and includes Palliating Legal Profession Pals
2. Recusation Writ
3. Commonwealth corporate filing,
4. CEO notice,
5. Request for Police investigation,
6a. Lord Mayor Natoli response,
6b. Lord Mayor Natoli response,
7. Statement to Maroochy Shire Council
8. Premiers office response scan,
9. Queensland State Parliament/Supreme Court doc,
10. Deputy Premiers office response scan,
11. MDAM death penalty notice,
12. MDAM at last.
13. One Million Dollars Reward
14. Maroochy Shire Council

Defendant Correspondence

Refer to Plaintiff Corrspondence - Common Law
For lots of correspondence between bank solicitors and the Cristian family.

Below
1st June 2006 - Letter from Paul Kean - Macedonie Christie Willis - to Fiona Cristian

16th June 2006 - Letter from Paul Kean - Macedonie Christie Willis - to Plaintiff Solicitors

21st June 2006 - Correspondence between Paul Kean and Plaintiff Solicitors

Fraudulent Misrepresentation - Mercantile Law - Paul Kean ignored this when advising Fiona Cristian
Paul Kean ignored the following -
1. Fraudulent Misrepresentation - Mercantile Law
2. Unconscionable Conduct - Contracts Review Act
3. Tort of Deceit - Tort Law
4. Section 36 (1) Consumer Credit Code
5. Section 51 Trade Practices Act (Paul acknowledged this one - ignored the rest)
6. Section 24 Under the Real Property Act

29th June 2006 - Letter from Paul Kean to Plaintiff Solicitors - We never gave instructions to Paul Kean to send this letter as it revealed personal sensitive financial information. After finding out this letter was sent + forgetting to follow through with important instructions we sent him by email + not advising of the range of remedies available (see above), we let him go because we felt that he was supporting the bank.

Email Correspondence between Paul Kean and the Cristians during May and June 2006

15th June 2006 - Letter from Paul Kean to Plaintiff Solicitors (better quality than the one above for 16th June 2006)

Defendant Judgement

15th November 2006 - Judgement for Writ of Possession by Justice Peter Hidden
15th November 2006 - Judgement Orders for Writ of Possession by Justice Peter Hidden

Defendant Transcripts

30th October 2006 - Transcript of hearing with Justice Peter Hidden
1st November 2006 - Transcript of hearing with Justice Peter Hidden
15th November 2006 - Transcript of Justice Peter Hidden Making Judgment for Writ of Possession.
5th December 2006 - Transcript of Registrar Howe
14th December 2006 - Transcript of Registrar Howe
15th December 2006 - Transcript of Justice James
21st December 2006 - Transcript of Justice Simpson
22nd December 2006 - Transcript of Justice Beazley A / B / C / D (Court of Appeal)

Holding Summons

Holding Summons
Summons For Leave To Appeal

Notice of Motion

Notice of Motions Filed In the Supreme Court

Affidavits

Affidavits Filed in the Court of Appeal
Affidavit 5th March 2007 - Fiona Caroline Cristian

Court Of Appeal - Equity

1. Registering Case Number 40381/07 - Court of Appeal - 14th June 2007 - File Number 40381-07.pdf

2. Ordinary Summons For Leave To Appeal - Updated 14th June 2007.pdf

3. DRAFT SUMMONS FOR APPEAL.doc

4. Judgement-Order Justice Nicholas 8th June 2007.pdf

5. Justice Nicholas Judgment Orders 12th June 2007.pdf

6. Transcripts (not uploaded as yet - They are all on order from the Court Transcripts Office)
a) Court of Appeal: Monday 2nd April 2007 - President Manson and Justice Hanley 40839/06
b) Equity Court: Thursday 7th June 2007 – Justice Nicholas - File Number: 003072/2007
c) Equity Court: Friday 8th June 2007 – Justice Nicholas – File Number: 003072/2007
d) Equity Court: Friday 12th June 2007 – Justice Nicholas – File Number: 003072/2007
e) Equity Court: Friday 14th June 2007 – Justice Nicholas – File Number: 003072/2007 Pedro Alfaro

7. Summons from Perpetual Limited 06-06-07.pdf

8. Submission Fiona Cristian Equity Court 7th June 2007.pdf

9. Submission To The Equity Court 8th June 2007.pdf

10. Facsimile To Chief Justice Young Equity Court 8th June 2007.pdf

11. Affidavit of Kylie Davies 06-06-07.pdf

Judgment - Court of Appeal Judgment 2nd April 2007

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL

CA 40839/06

MASON P
HANDLEY AJA

Monday 2 April 2007

FIONA CAROLINE CRISTIAN v PERPETUAL LIMITED, FORMERLY KNOWN AS PERPETUAL TRUSTEE AUSTRALIA LIMITED, (ACN 000431827)

JUDGMENT

1 MASON P: We have heard fuller than usual argument in support of an application for leave to appeal. The argument has been presented in written form and through the oral submissions of Mr Cristian, who is the husband of the claimant and has spoken on her behalf.

2 The matter before the court today is whether to grant leave to appeal against the orders pronounced by Hidden J on 15 November 2006. His Honour ordered that the defendant give the plaintiff possession of certain land and that the plaintiff have leave to issue a writ of possession. He made an order for costs. He directed that the matter be listed for further directions before the Registrar for the outstanding matters that were to be addressed in the proceedings.

3 In his reasons Hidden J stated that,

“The simple fact is that a loan contract was entered into for a certain amount of principal at a certain interest rate. The mortgage was signed consistent with that loan contract and to secure repayment of the loan with interest. It is common ground that there has been default in that no payment has ever been made, and in those circumstances, the plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment for possession.”
4 It was clear to his Honour, as it is clear to me, that the claimant wants to agitate a wide ranging set of issues against the opponent and, it would appear, third parties, including the broker/agent who was involved in the transaction.

5 Mr Cristian has made allegations of fraud, unconscionable dealing and misrepresentation. Some of these appear to be foreshadowed in the document called, First Cross-Claim Cross-Summons, dated 30 October 2006 that was before Hidden J. Other matters were foreshadowed in affidavits that were read before his Honour and no doubt in the submissions put to his Honour.

6 It is not disputed that a mortgage was signed and registered. It is not disputed that various formalities under the Conveyancing Act 1919 concerning the exercise of the mortgagee’s rights were complied with. It is not disputed that the mortgagee paid money and arranged for the discharge of an existing mortgage over the subject property.

7 In Inglis v Commonwealth Trading Bank of Australia (1972) 126 CLR 161 at 164-5, Walsh J gave a judgment which received the approval of the High Court on appeal (see 126 CLR at 168-9). His Honour said this:

“In my opinion, the authorities which I have been able to examine establish that for the purpose of the application of the general rule to which I have referred, nothing short of actual payment is regarded as sufficient to extinguish a mortgage debt. If the debt has not been actually paid, the Court will not, at any rate as a general rule, interfere to deprive the mortgagee of the benefit of his security, except upon terms that an equivalent safeguard is provided to him, by means of the plaintiff bringing in an amount sufficient to meet what is claimed by the mortgagee to be due.

The benefit of having a security for a debt would be greatly diminished if the fact that a debtor has raised claims for damages against the mortgagee were allowed to prevent any enforcement of the security until after the litigation of those claims had been completed.”

8 Mr Justice Walsh did not state an absolute rule and one cannot overlook that fact. Nevertheless, I see nothing on what has been put to us today or was put before Hidden J to take the case outside of the general principle.

9 Mr Cristian has indicated that various claims are intended to be brought, presumably in what remains of the present proceedings in the Common Law Division. The order and judgment of Hidden J does not prevent those matters being litigated in the Supreme Court.

10 In my view, his Honour would have been in error if he had not granted summary judgment for possession in the circumstances here prevailing.

11 The dispute that is foreshadowed as to the possible misunderstanding or possible misrepresentation - I stress possible - as to the full effect of the loan contract cannot remove the fact that the document was signed and registered and became the basis of the relationship between the parties.

12 If a claim based on misrepresentation or fraud or unconscientious dealing is to be litigated then so be it. But the law, as I understand it, is clear that a party that succeeds on such a claim will be required to give counter-restitution and to repay any benefit that was received in consequence of the transaction that he or she seeks to impugn. The rule stated by Walsh J is in one sense an aspect of that more fundamental principle.

13 Mr Cristian foreshadowed arguments based upon the nature of legal tender in this country. I do not consider those arguments have any merit. They certainly raise nothing relevant to the matter that is before this Court.

14 I propose that leave to appeal against the orders of Hidden J made on 15 November 2006 be refused and that the summons before this court be dismissed with costs.

15 HANDLEY AJA: I agree.

16 MASON P: That is the order of the court.

**********

Summary of Claimant's Argument

We have left most information out, particularly the rules of court, until the time is right.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
NEW SOUTH WALES
SYDNEY REGISTRY

COURT OF APPEAL File No: 40839 of 2006

BETWEEN Fiona Caroline Cristian
Claimant

- and –

PERPETUAL LIMITED
FORMERLY KNOWN AS
PERPETUAL TRUSTEE
AUSTRALIA LIMITED
Opponent

CLAIMANT’S WHITE FOLDER

Containing:
(a) Summons for Leave to Appeal
(b) Summary of Claimant’s Argument, 1. 2. 3.
(c) Judgment of Hidden J
(d) Transcripts - 30th October 2006 - 1st November 2006 - 15th November 2006
(e) Common Law Documents – Defendant: Fiona Caroline Cristian (all) filed before judgment by Hidden J - 15/11/06. 1. Notice of Appearance. 2. Defence.
3. Cross Claim / Cross Summons. 4. Affidavit of Arthur Cristian. 5. Exhibits (part of).
6. Affidavit of John Hartney. 7. First Affidavit of Fiona Caroline Cristian.
8. Second Affidavit of Fiona Caroline Cristian. 9. Third Affidavit of Fiona Caroline
Cristian. 10. Notice of Motion joining Macquarie Mortgages. 11. Notice of Motion
joining Galilee Solicitors. 12. Notice of Motion for Discovery.
(f) Common Law Documents – Plaintiff: Perpetual Limited (all) filed before judgment by Hidden J - 15/11/06. 1. Statement of Claim. 2. Notice of Motion.
3. Affidavit of Amanda Sherwood. 4. Exhibit AS1 – Loan Contract. 5. Exhibit
AS2 – Certificate of Title. 6. Exhibit AS3 – Mortgage. 7. Exhibit AS4 –
Mortgage Memorandum. 8. Exhibit AS5 – Letter, Real Property Act Sect
57(2)(b). 9. Exhibit AS6 – Letter, Consumer Credit Code Sect 80
(g) Draft Notice of Appeal
(h) Other Documents 1. Letter Dr Evan Jones Sydney University, Political
Economics 28/02/07. 2. Notice to Vacate – Nowra Sheriff. 3. 8th Affidavit
Fiona Cristian filed in Court of Appeal 22/12/06. 4. Amended Notice of
Motion filed in Court of Appeal 22/12/06. 5. Corporation Australia. 6. Note
to refer 6th Affidavit Fiona Cristian located in Summary of Claimants
Argument Part B. 7. Two Notice of Motions filed 28/11/06 and dismissed by
Registrar Howe 14/12/06.
(i) Opponent’s Documents
(j) Claimant’s Reply
Claimant: Fiona Caroline Cristian : - Phone: 0418 203204

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
NEW SOUTH WALES
SYDNEY REGISTRY

COURT OF APPEAL File No: 40839 of 2006

COURT BELOW:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
NEW SOUTH WALES
SYDNEY REGISTRY
COMMON LAW DIVISION File No: 13403 of 2006

OVERVIEW OF CLAIMANTS ARGUMENT

1.
Claimant’s Personal Introduction to
Rules of Court
(1 Page)

2.
PART A
(9 Pages)

Rules Of Court
By Enid Campbell Professor Of Law

A Study of Rule Making Powers And Procedures

3.
PART B
(19 Pages)

SUMMARY OF CLAIMANTS ARGUMENT

67 Points of Argument

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Claimant’s Personal Introduction to
Rules of Court

The Legal Profession self admitted skullduggery, collusionism and power with banks is to be diminished and this document is the start of it. My salvojure right and the rights of all other victims for self-defence against the legal profession court and banking judiciary antagonist and tyranny.

What you have here is only the tip of the iceberg that is going to come crashing down on this evil system. The whole of Australia, particularly the common ordinary people, are going to discover your secrets and anfractus legal profession underhanded legal secret intricacies, to be known by those you insultingly call frivolous, void of legal capacity and despairingly call laymen, fellow man, humans and mankind, because they are not sufficiently mentally developed in legal profession treachery, and the knowledge of legal profession bank property stealing treachery. Those who are unaware of your clandestine extortionist activities, which are now to be made public far and wide, are about to learn and discover and be enlightened about your legal processes and procedures. My husband and I will engage others in assisting us to plan to make re-enactments of our court case and others. There is no way Judges, Magistrates, Registrars, Barristers, Lawyers, Solicitors, Politicians, Bureaucrats and Bankers are going to escape the ultimate reprimand for their misconduct by aggravated victims and animosity.

This document IS the legal profession and banking admissions, that they lie, cheat, steal, swindle, alter transcripts and practice endless deceitful activity of scoundrels as shown in the rules of court which are so self evident, incontrovertible and unarguable. Sign of the T is very significant. You are the T error ist and you make terrorism laws purposely to label others as terrorists so you can convict them for standing up against you. Your terrorism is a errorism with a T in front of it and you use this as a weapon against anybody who is fed up with your evil activity because you undeniably allow them no recourse. So you give them the false title of Terrorist when they are dissatisfied and object to evil dictator conduct such as property theft. You cannot deny you are the terrorist and you accuse anyone who goes against you of being a terrorist.

There is only one way to ameliorate (to make things better for all concerned) this situation and that is for the court to order a tender of amends by returning the property rightfully unencumbered, be appropriately compensated in eight figures, remove my husbands bankruptcy and in return I will cease my plans of retaliation immediately. I am prepared to hold off for 48 hours (Wednesday 10.00am 7th March 2007). If there is no favourable reply I will then be justified in exposing even more serious information that will be petitioned to the public and who will discover the full extent of the legal profession and banking corrupt activism, which is too shocking to contemplate. You are facing your own grave dangers caused by your own literature.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
NEW SOUTH WALES
SYDNEY REGISTRY

COURT OF APPEAL File No: 40839 of 2006

COURT BELOW:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
NEW SOUTH WALES
SYDNEY REGISTRY

COMMON LAW DIVISION File No: 13403 of 2006

SUMMARY OF CLAIMANTS ARGUMENT
PART A

Rules of Court
By
Enid Campbell Professor Of Law
Occupying The Chair Of
Sir Isaacs Isaacs Professor of Law
At
The Monash University

ISBN No 0 455 20630 9
1932
Comprising
A Study of Rule Making Powers And Procedures

This book is Clearly directing the legal profession to legally swindle, exploit, deceive, Persecute and plunder the trusting duped naive masses of Law trusting victims as the Following two excerpts reveal amply for the public to consider and self discover.

Abuse of Process
Page 234.

Withheld for now.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summons For Leave To appeal

Summons For Leave To Appeal - See PDF Attachment

Transcripts

placeholder

Correspondence

Facsimile to Chief Justice Wolstenholme Young - Equity Court NSW Supreme Court 8th June 2007 (see the Submission For Defendant Fiona Cristian under Equity Court)

Judgment - Order

1. See PDF attachment for Order-Judgment of Justice Nicholas 8th June 2007

2. Justice Nicholas Judgment Orders 12th June 2007.pdf (Ex-Parte Order/Judgment To Remove Pedro Alfaro's Caveat - Pedro did not receive a summons to go to court, yet Fiona Cristian received a summons to go to court about her caveat 7th/8th June 2007- Double Standards! - Also, An order was made by Justice Nicholas to stop the Land Title's office from accepting any further caveat's on this property)