This organised pseudolegal commercial argument claims that our original government was hijacked, and the entity is now just a “corporation” “posing as a government” and hold as evidence of this fallacy, our registration details in the United States Security Exchange Commision.
The Commonwealth of Australia IS NOT a registered corporation… The Commonwealth of Australia HAS a registered corporation… But it does not exist as one itself.
A business club or stock exchange is in itself a corporation, and therefore registration with it’s own regulatory body is necessary. The registration of the Commonwealth of Australia does not take anything away from the substance of the entity that it represents, it’s still a Statutory Corporation created by our own parliament, and not some commercial ‘Registered Corporation’ like Mcdonald’s or Monsanto.
TECHNICALLY, AUSTRALIA ALWAYS WAS A CORPORATION…
Tony Abbot’s statement that Australia “…OWES IT’S EXISTENCE TO A FORM OF FOREIGN INVESTMENT BY THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT…” is in fact, historically accurate. This country was originally founded by a Royal Charter, creating an entity known as a Chartered Corporation.
Although people generally associate corporations, sometimes negatively, with private business, corporations in theory began as means to serve public purposes. Corporate theory has its roots in primarily government and religious institutions, where the institution itself is identifiable independently of its membership’s mortality. For example, if the Pope dies, the Catholic Church continues to exist, just as it continues to exist as generations pass on and get replaced by new members.
The corporate status of the Commonwealth of Australia was created in order to represent an entity that couldn’t normally be brought to court. After all, you can’t summon the entire Commonwealth of Australia to court, that would make for quite the crowded court room. Hence the creation of this corporation.
Ironically, this was done to make the legal process easier and it is for those who choose to understand it legitimately.
There are individual types of different corporate structures that serve different purposes, for example, a Chartered Corporation is created by Crown Assent, and a Statutory Corporation is created by a Statute of a Parliament, but a Registered Corporation is created merely by registration with a nations commercial regulatory body.
The British Crown itself is a Corporate Sole, it is a perpetual structure of corporation, an abstract metonymic concept that represents the legal embodiment of the royal monarch. As a result of the Magna Charter, the notion of parliamentary sovereignty and government by majority rule, it then represented the legal embodiment of the executive government. Most corporations by letters patent are corporations sole and not companies as the term is commonly understood today.
The governments of all the British colonies each became an independent self-governing corporations of their own, by virtue of letters patent and the Statute of Westminster Act 1931, which granted each colony full legislative independence from the British Parliament. These self-governing bodies then each had their own independant “Crown”, each the same perpetual structure of corporation, an abstract metonymic concept that represented the legal embodiment of the executive government of Australia.
According to Oxford Australian Law Dictionary “The Crown” is a corporate sole, an “abstract metonymic concept” that “represents the legal embodiment of the executive government”.
At one time a royal charter was the only means by which an incorporated body could be formed, but other means (such as the registration process for limited companies) are generally used nowadays instead.
A royal charter is a formal document issued by a monarch as letters patent, granting a right or power to an individual or a body corporate. They were, and are still, used to establish significant organisations such as cities (with municipal charters) or universities.
The British monarchy has issued over 980 royal charters. Of these about 750 remain in existence. The earliest was to the town of Tain in 1066, making it the oldest Royal Burgh in Scotland, followed by the University of Cambridge in 1231.
Charters have been used in Europe since medieval times to create cities (that is, localities with recognised legal rights and privileges). The date that such a charter is granted is considered to be when a city is ‘founded’, regardless of when the locality originally began to be settled (which is often impossible to determine).
Chartered companies were usually formed, incorporated and legitimised under a royal or, in republics, an equivalent government charter. This document set out the terms under which the company could trade; defined its boundaries of influence, and described its rights and responsibilities.
Before the passing of modern companies legislation, these were the only types of companies. Now they are relatively rare, except for very old companies that still survive (of which there are still many, particularly many British banks), or modern societies that fulfill a quasi regulatory function (for example, the Bank of England is a corporation formed by a modern charter).
Chartered companies enabled states to use private resources for exploration and trade beyond the means of the limited resources of the treasury.
Tasmania was incorporated in 1825…
This entity was founded by a royal charter, which would make it a “chartered corporation” by definition, as opposed to South Australia, that was founded by an act of British Parliament, which would make the entity a “statutory corporation”.
The Van Diemen’s Land Company was created in 1824, and received a Royal Charter in 1825. The company was a group of London merchants who planned a wool growing venture to supply the needs of the British textile industry.
This chartered corporation was established only 22 years after the first settlers arrived in 1803, and 25 years before the Westminster Parliament passed the Australian Colonies Government Act 1850, first granting the right of legislative power to each of the six Australian colonies.
It had already proclaimed itself a separate colony from New South Wales, with its own judicial establishment and Legislative Council, on 3 December 1825, as a result of this royal charter.
South Australia was incorporated as a “statutory corporation” in 1835…
The formation of the company followed considerable lobbying by the South Australian Association, a group consisting of philanthropists, radical thinkers, dissenters and merchants. After a years of negotiation, false starts, changes and amendments to suggested charters, the British Parliament finally gave approval and passed the South Australian Foundation Act on 15 August 1834.
The Company provided basic infrastructure for the new colony, as well as sold or leased land to immigrants who came to settle.
A statutory corporation is a corporation created by statute. Their precise nature varies by jurisdiction thus they might be ordinary companies/corporations owned by a government with or without other shareholders, or they might be a body without shareholders which is controlled by national or sub-national government to the (in some cases minimal) extent provided for in the creating legislation.
In Australia, statutory corporations are created by Acts of state or federal parliaments. Current statutory corporations include Australia Post, Airservices Australia, the Australian Rail Track Corporation and the Australian Egg Corporation. The purpose of their separation from normal government operations is to ensure profitability, and in theory, independence of decision making from the state or national government (to ensure that decisions are made on a commercial basis with less or no political interference.)
As statutory corporations, their regulatory and business conditions may be significantly different from private-sector companies. An example of this in Australia is the regulatory conditions placed on the national communications company Telstra.
A significant number of the statutory corporations are private commercial operations, a number of which have been privatised, in part or in whole, since the 1980s: these have included the national airline Qantas, Telstra (also previously known as Telecom Australia), and the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.
A public-benefit corporation is a public corporation chartered by a state designed to perform some public benefit. A public authority is a type of public-benefit corporation that takes on a more bureaucratic role, such as the maintenance of public infrastructure, that often has broad powers to regulate or maintain public property.
Public-benefit corporations are most often created by statute. In many Commonwealth countries, public-benefit corporations continue to receive charters from the British monarchy.
As you can see, the commercial argument theory needs to recognise the definitions of different corporate entities for a start, and also learn the marked differences between them, as listed in the reference sections here, and commonly accepted in mainstream dictionaries and encyclopedias…
If one researches and understands corporate structures, it becomes obvious why they cannot use the Corporations Act 2001 against a fully exempt public authority and instrumentality of the Crown.. The freeman premise of a fiduciary “contract” with your government is also false, as it does not act in the capacity of a registered corporation, that is legally dealt with on a civil court level, with issues pertaining to commercial law. These Statutory Corporations are not some “company” that you can choose (or not choose) to “contract” with, as defined in the Corporations Act 2001.
These entities ultimately remain statutory authorities created by parliament, by representatives having the electoral majority consent of the governed, and as such these entities also have the valid force of law throughout it’s jurisdiction.
A similar premise implies that THE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE is some sort of international law that applies to every nation, but this is also completely false. Every sovereign nation has the discretion to reject or include whatever part of it into it’s own provisions. The U.C.C. is not really applicable in Australia, it mainly operates in the USA, and we have only adopted Article 9 and Article 3 in Australia, which is limited by the current state and federal laws…
“In general, Article 9 does not govern real property security interests, except for fixtures to real property. Mortgages, deeds of trust, and installment land contracts, which are the principal forms of real property security interests, remain governed by state laws.”
The closest thing we have to U.C.C. in Australia is the Personal Property Securities Register but its not the same thing. In that act it also clarifies the exclusion of current laws…
PERSONAL PROPERTY SECURITIES ACT 2009 – SECT 254(1)
“This Act is not intended to exclude or limit the operation of any of the following laws (a concurrent law), to the extent that the law is capable of operating concurrently with this Act:
(a) a law of the Commonwealth (other than this Act);
(b) a law of a State or Territory;
(c) the general law.”
This exclusion of current laws is also clarified in the Corporations Act…
CORPORATIONS ACT 2001 – SECT 5E(1)
“The Corporations legislation is not intended to exclude or limit the concurrent operation of any law of a State or Territory.”
And the exemptionary status of all public authorities…
CORPORATIONS ACT 2001 – SECT 57A(2)
“Neither of the following is a corporation:
(a) an exempt public authority;
(b) a corporation sole.
“exempt public authority” means a body corporate that is incorporated within Australia or an external Territory and is:
(a) a public authority; or
(b) an instrumentality or agency of the Crown in right of the Commonwealth, in right of a State or in right of a Territory.”
You must log in to post a comment.