@MoJGovUK When Court Orders are Void. What ‘fundamental defects’ do we find?

This blog post about void court orders was brought to my attention and quotes not only critical principles, but also relevant case law:

A void order does not have to be obeyed because, for example, in Crane v Director of Public Prosecutions [1921] it was stated that if an order is void ab initio (from the beginning) then there is no real order of the Court.

A void order results from a ‘fundamental defect’ in proceedings:

  • a fundamental defect in proceedings will make the whole proceedings a nullity;
  • a nullity cannot be waived;
  • it is never too late to raise the issue of nullity; and
  • a person affected by a void order has the right – ex debito justitiae – to have it set aside.

A ‘fundamental defect’ includes

  • a failure to serve process;
  • failure to comply with a statutory requirement (Smurthwaite v Hannay [1894]);
  • a ‘without jurisdiction’ / ultra vires act which is any act which a Court did not have power to do (Lord Denning in Firman v Ellis [1978]).

‘Without jurisdiction’ obviously also applies when ‘official court documents’ are faked, i.e. the ‘authority’ of a court is falsely invoked by white collar criminals. This deception / fraud may be hard to spot, but it is

  • a non-insurable event!

And the significance of insuring local councils was the issue for an Early Day Motion already in 1996. Institutions live longer than individuals!…

My big question:

  • is is a ‘fundamental defect’ to hear the CRIMINAL allegations of child witnesses in a SECRET family court?

When the magic of ‘related articles’ find this link below, it demonstrates one of the important avenues forward: ‘contract law’ between ‘consenting parties’ – generally about the value of a ‘trade transaction’.

In the end, our dishonest money system is definitely the best explanation for a lot of the corruption we’re seeing: sex, money or both. Or other ‘material perks’, as long as ethical, moral, spiritual values can be avoided…

Still, I shall keep blogging and won’t give up hope!


About Sabine Kurjo McNeill

I'm a mathematician and system analyst formerly at CERN in Geneva and became an event organiser, software designer, independent web publisher and online promoter of Open Justice. My most significant scientific contribution is www.smartknowledge.space
This entry was posted in Rule of Law and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to @MoJGovUK When Court Orders are Void. What ‘fundamental defects’ do we find?

  1. Peter B says:

    There is an important distinction to remember . However daft a Court order is, it is valid until such time it is set aside , appealed, etc.

    Like wise with an act of Parliament. If Parliament passes a daft law like all blue eyed babies should be killed at birth , then that is the law , until such time it is overturned , they annul/replace it.

    As to
    “is is a ‘fundamental defect’ to hear the CRIMINAL allegations of child witnesses in a SECRET family court? ”

    The quickest answer will be to write to MOJ, MP etc and ask under what act/ law,
    regulation , statutory instrument or rule do they rely? Or is this just Judge made law ? When you find out the answer to that question , then you will know how you can go about challenging it.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Someone might just be knocking the last nail into the South Wales Police coffin but I, having spent a third of my life on South Wales, could not possibly comment

  3. Another important factor is that Time Limits do not apply to Void Orders since they are void from the beginning.Lord Denning and many others.

    It is not a question of how daft a Court Order is or may appear to be. That is only an opinion, The Question is whether the Order is Void under Law. And if it is Void then it is unlawful. If it is unlawful it derives no power from Law.. And there is no power greater than the Law. Proving it to a court who may have a vested interest in protecting their judgement’s saving embarrassment! and/or reputation by improper means by avoiding or rather evading the fraud error or mistake of the decision maker is probably the reason why this rather nasty and abusive behavior of decision makers to make Void Orders continues. (this was common practice in the previous Legal Complaint Service (now the SRA) will these practices change because the LCS is now the SRA?).

    Never mind that a Void Order need not be obeyed. The Judge/s or Decision Makers are given power under the Law to make orders and must follow the CPR and Statutory Legislation, and a failure to obey these rules are a breach of procedure which will make such Orders unfair and therefore unlawful.

    — Just as all the previous judgement over many decades (although quite why so much valuable public assets (Court Hearings and Appeals) should have wasted time considering whether unlawful decisions should be made lawful is in my judgement ridiculous.). If the Order was made lawfully and this includes compliance with CPR and Statutory and Common Law it is unlawful and lacks the authority of Law. If it must be obeyed it would have unlawful consequences on all affected persons. In the Army Soldiers have a duty to obey all lawful commands, if they obey an unlawful command we can remember bringing Nazi war criminals to justice, the Nuremberg trials.

    In my own case I have been dealing with this issue in the Courts since the High Court made a Tomlin Order 1st March 2002. During this time I have examined this matter of Void Court Orders and the principle behind the issue of “res judicata” reɪz ˌdʒuːdɪˈkɑːtə/ nounLAW ” a matter that has been adjudicated by a competent court and therefore may not be pursued further by the same parties”. The offender in this case is a solicitor as sole executor and trustee has plundered our parent’s estate, and in an abuse of process has breached the schedule to a Tomlin Order, then breached the Order; That all further proceedings be stayed upon the terms agreed etc.

    Then after deducting the bill of costs assessed as agreed, he drew up another bill of costs and deducted that also from the Estate accounts. Then in breach of the Order that all further proceedings be stayed., made a claim for non-payment although he had already taken the money. This solicitor singled me out for making a complaint to the LCS (now SRA. The Police recorded the statutory offence of perverting the course of jusice, but then only made a pretence of investigating it. (The police withheld information from PCC. The County Court and others have ignored the “res judicata” and more than twelve hearings since 2004 have continued to support the solicitor.

    (see: https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/03f72ac6-b20d-437e-a35a-70f4707bcb44 )


  4. My comment on the question “is a ‘fundamental defect’ to hear the CRIMINAL allegations of child witnesses in a SECRET family court? ”
    First if the Criminal allegations are made by a child in a Secret Family Court – the Court cannot deny and yet need not admit hearing the allegations, as the Hearing is Secret. One would “hope” that the Judge using his discretion would consider and act appropriately to decide whether it is fair and reasonable to ask or order the Police to investigate. and/or deal with the matter as a civil issue ie involve SS.

  5. Anonomi says:

    if a judge makes something lawful which is unlawful then that is treason, per Lord Bingham.

    If an order is void it has to be set aside – the problem is that we have corrupt judiciary in place to cover up for other corrupt judiciary. And to appeal a void order you invariably need a permission to appeal which is at a judges discretion and can refuse permission just like that finding some excuse or other.

    As for obedience to court orders one only has to look at the orders in the family courts and tribunals that are regularly ignored or not enforced [in reported judgements]. So whether an order is void or not is often irrelevant. An order is discretionary and its obedience is therefore discretionary. A court can always set it aside. It seems any person or body that is funded by the taxpayer invariably wins. How do you explain that?

    If you actually look into some of the case law quoted in the article which appears to be a cut and paste from elsewhere on the web some have been overridden by statute and others do not seem to refer to the point.

  6. Renata Ostertag says:

    In what case in the 21st century (1921 is almost 100 years ago) has this been used please?


    • John Love says:


      The judge KNEW he was filing a VOID order in 1995, and once it was done he convinced EIGHT other judges to cover up his misconduct with yet additional VOID orders. Even the SEVEN Justices of the Georgia Supreme Court made the choice to participate in the cover up. This is a CRIME of the COURTS…..and a violation of 18 U.S.C.§§1961-68…..the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act!

      It is my opinion (in the US or UK) that once a void judgement is made through fraud error or mistake, and the order is followed that results in further void orders (as these orders or judgements follow on from the unlawful or void act). the courts will continue to ignore that the first void order was void. This is because it would immediately expose a casual attitude that fails to consider all the relevant evidence.

      the following text from; http://www.landofthefree.co.uk/site/component/content/article/1-latest-news/151-when-court-orders-are-void includes dates; [1978] (Lord Diplock in Isaacs v Robertson (1984) 43 W.I.R. PC at 128-130). (Wandsworth London Borough Council v. Winder [1985] In Bellinger v Bellinger [2003] UKHL 21 the House of Lords confirmed that a void act is void from the outset and no Court – not even the House of Lords (now the Supreme Court) – has jurisdiction to give legal effect to a void act no matter how unreasonable that may seem, because doing so would mean reforming the law which no Court has power to do because such power rests only with Parliament. The duty of the Court is to interpret and apply the law not reform or create it. In R v. Clarke and McDaid [2008] UKHL8 the House of Lords confirmed that there is no valid trial if the bill/Indictment has not been signed by an appropriate officer of the Court because Parliament intended that the Indictment be signed by a proper officer of the Court.

      • Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee says:

        I, Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee refer to John Love and say as follows that:-

        1. The Coroners and Justice Act 2009 did make some amendments to the 1933 Act, where some words had been repealed, which does override and superseded the Decision given in the House of Lords R V Clarke and McDaid [2008] U K H L 8

        2. There is a Legal Right to Apply for a Volunteer Bill of Indictment in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division whilst under the Senior Courts Act 1981 Schedule 7, There are many Statutory Acts which have been repealed.

        3. There are Criminal Procedure Rules, whilst there is some confusion with the 2016 Statutory Instrument which does make some changes to Part 10, where Permission of the High Court is required as when making an Application for Permission of the High Court judge, a Copy has to be served on the Respondent/Accused Person.

        4. The Town and Country Planning Act 1971, The Whole Act had been repealed, whilst there was Section 32 of the TCPA 1971, as This has been continued under Section 73 A of the T C P A 1990 (as inserted by the Planning and Compensation Act 1991}

        5. There is Section 11 (a) (b) of the Human Rights Act 1998, as some of the Judgments given in the United Kingdom doesn’t mention of Section 11 (a) (b) of the Human Rights Act 1998, as the DPP for the Crown Prosecution Services does some times mislead the House of Lords and the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

        Yours Faithfully

        Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee.

  7. A void order should be set aside by the court who made that order. However , practice is not theory. If a court knowingly issued a void order, then I imagine it will be more than reluctant to set that order aside. The secondary problem ,of course, is the beneficiary of the void order may well wish to enforce it ! If anyone feels they have a void order then I am happy to give them free advice. I am a McKenzie friend and can be contacted on info@thepeterboroughfriend.co.uk.

    • Graham says:

      Can you ring me on 01454 418993 Bristol

    • Graham FQ says:

      It does not make any difference if the void order is verified by exhibits and the Court conducted fraud to achieve that, then all the Court needs to do is ignore you, you wont get the police to do anything. Your dealing with nutters. These Court lawyers are members and protected by the Solicitors Regulations Authority. Remember a court judgement is law until challenged collaterally but it can only be challenged if the Court had noting to do with the abuse or invalidity of the process. If the court conducted mal administration, then they will ignored you because they do not have to follow procedures. Courts are not accountable for ultra vires or fraud. If you insist they will make an order against you as a vexatious litigant and then they can use that judgment to ignore anything even though the lawful authorities state that you are entitled to issue a notice to set decisions aside, Your country does not have courts HMCTS is not a lawful Institution of adjudication. They think you are all stupid and the Solicitors Regulation Authority are right behind all this corruption.

  8. Pingback: Dear 2016 Presidential Candidate, What’s causing the DCF deaths and the separation of our families? | Children's Rights

  9. Graham Q says:

    What are we going to do if we cannot stop treason in UK courts.

  10. Graham FQ says:

    You are all wasting your time. Until you get Parliament to enforce the law HMCTS and Judiciary are going to continue falsifying Court papers in order to invalidate judicial review or similar application notices thus making decisions in favour of public authority. You are currently a laughing stock because the UK now has the worst legal system in the world. I have many judgments from the High Court verifying Treasonous conduct of Judges. Its done through all the Commissions set up in the UK to protect the establishment. Even the Solicitors Regulation Authority, Legal Ombudsman, Parliamentary Ombudsman, Human Rights Commission are all in it together to deny your rights and in so doing they reward lawyers because all lawyers have to c comply wih SRA protocol and that means accepting the Treason in our Courts – otherwise they are struck off.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s