Court jurisdiction - Admiralty vs common law

[CookMySock]

Title says it all. Has far reaching consequences it seems.

Anyone studied this?

Steve

[davereid]

How the hell you ever crashed a Hyosung into a fishing boat I'll never know...

[CookMySock]

How the hell you ever crashed a Hyosung into a fishing boat I'll never know...

Nah really, it seems that we are only governed by statute law if we consent to be. And we can state that we do not consent.

Steve

[Mully]

Nah really, it seems that we are only governed by statute law if we consent to be. And we can state that we do not consent.

Oh, please let this be heading somewhere interesting. This has so much potential.

[Katman]

I think it's just an opportunity for DB to post a picture of himself in drag.

[civil]

Title says it all. Has far reaching consequences it seems.

Anyone studied this?

Steve

Dangerous thing personal responsibility. So much easier to take the pink pill and stay ignorant.

[CookMySock]

Dangerous thing personal responsibility. So much easier to take the pink pill and stay ignorant.

You know more than you are letting on?

I'd be more specific, but I'd rather hear from someone who is actually doing it.

Steve

[Ronin]

Nah really, it seems that we are only governed by statute law if we consent to be. And we can state that we do not consent.

Steve

Please at least give us a link so that we have even half an idea of what is happening in your disturbed little head.

[CookMySock]

Please at least give us a link so that we have even half an idea of what is happening in your disturbed little head.

I want to hear from someone else who knows what I'm on about first. There are a few, and they have either not seen this yet, or they are staying quiet.

However, google is your friend. If you find some tidbit, please do some research on it first before taking this thread off-topic.

Reminder that this IS in the Politics/Law section for a good reason, which with any luck will soon become clear.

Steve

[HenryDorsetCase]

Title says it all. Has far reaching consequences it seems.

Anyone studied this?

Steve

From my limited recollection, Admiralty is a jurisdiction in the same way that the courts of Equity were. There are some interesting and spcial rules relating to the way things are done IIRC. Its a pretty specialised area of Lor.

What genius scheme have you concocted, that hinges on your gaining an understanding of this? Enquiring minds...

[HenryDorsetCase]

Nah really, it seems that we are only governed by statute law if we consent to be. And we can state that we do not consent.

Steve

to a certain extent this would appear to be true. Given we are a free and relatively democratic country then you are not compelled to stay here. If you do not consent to being goverend by, as you put it, "statute law" then you are, it seems to me, free to leave.

Surely, surely your position is NOT "I do not consent to being governed by this Lor" because that is just retarded. "I do not consent to being liable for exceeding 100kph on the open road, so you can stick your ticket" "I do not consent to the Lor that says I have to register my motorcycle, so you can stick that as well" "I do not consent to abiding by food hygene and safety standards: they arent chocolate chips, they're bits of poo: my poo"

You see where this is going?

Also that is a particularly unattractive transvestite in that photo. I'm just saying.

[Ronin]

to a certain extent this would appear to be true. Given we are a free and relatively democratic country then you are not compelled to stay here. If you do not consent to being goverend by, as you put it, "statute law" then you are, it seems to me, free to leave.

Surely, surely your position is NOT "I do not consent to being governed by this Lor" because that is just retarded. "I do not consent to being liable for exceeding 100kph on the open road, so you can stick your ticket" "I do not consent to the Lor that says I have to register my motorcycle, so you can stick that as well" "I do not consent to abiding by food hygene and safety standards: they arent chocolate chips, they're bits of poo: my poo"

You see where this is going?

Also that is a particularly unattractive transvestite in that photo. I'm just saying.

And here I thought the Hyo was going to be registered as a ship...

FWIW... With you on the tranny

[HenryDorsetCase]

4 Extent of admiralty jurisdiction

*

(1) The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of the following questions or claims:
o

(a) Any claim to the possession or ownership of a ship or to the ownership of any share therein:
o

(b) Any question arising between the co-owners of a ship as to possession, employment, or earnings of that ship:
o

(c) Any claim in respect of a mortgage of or charge on a ship or any share therein:
o

(d) Any claim for damage done by a ship:
o

(e) Any claim for damage received by a ship:
o

(f) Any claim for loss of life or personal injury sustained in consequence of any defect in a ship or in her apparel or equipment, or of the wrongful act, neglect, or default of the owners, charterers, or persons in possession or control of a ship or of the master or crew thereof or of any other person for whose wrongful acts, neglects, or defaults the owners, charterers, or persons in possession or control of a ship are responsible, being an act, neglect, or default in the navigation or management of the ship, in the loading, carriage, or discharge of goods on, in, or from the ship or in the embarkation, carriage, or disembarkation of persons on, in, or from the ship:
o

(g) Any claim for loss of or damage to goods carried in a ship:
o

(h) Any claim arising out of any agreement relating to the carriage of goods in a ship or to the use or hire of a ship:
o

(i) Any claim in the nature of salvage (including claims for services rendered in saving life from a ship or an aircraft or in preserving its cargo, apparel, or wreck pursuant to the provisions of Part 17 of the Maritime Transport Act 1994 or any maritime rules made in relation to salvage):
o

(j) Any claim in the nature of towage in respect of a ship or an aircraft:
o

(k) Any claim in the nature of pilotage in respect of a ship or an aircraft:
o

(l) Any claim in respect of goods, materials, or services (including stevedoring and lighterage services) supplied or to be supplied to a ship in its operation or maintenance:
o

(m) Any claim in respect of the construction, repair, or equipment of a ship or for dock or port or harbour charges or dues:
o

(n) [Repealed]
o

(o) Any claim by a master or member of the crew of a ship for wages, and any claim by or in respect of a master or member of the crew of a ship for any money or property which, under any of the provisions of the Maritime Transport Act 1994, is recoverable as wages or in the Court and in the manner in which wages may be recovered:
o

(p) Any claim by a master, shipper, charterer, or agent in respect of disbursements made on account of a ship:
o

(q) Any claim arising out of an act which is or is claimed to be a general average act:
o

(r) Any claim arising out of bottomry:
o

(s) Any claim for the forfeiture or condemnation of a ship or of goods which are being or have been carried, or have been attempted to be carried, in a ship, or for the restoration of a ship or any such goods after seizure, or for droits of admiralty.

(2) In addition to the jurisdiction specified in subsection (1) of this section, the High Court shall continue to have any other admiralty jurisdiction which was vested in it immediately before the commencement of this Act, and when exercising its admiralty jurisdiction shall also have any other jurisdiction connected with ships or aircraft which is vested in the Court under any other Act.

(3) The jurisdiction of the Court under paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of this section includes power to settle any account outstanding and unsettled between the parties in relation to the ship, and to direct that the ship, or any share thereof, shall be sold, and to make such other order as the Court thinks fit.

(4) The provisions of this section apply—
o

(a) In relation to all ships or aircraft, whether New Zealand ships or aircraft or not, and whether registered or not, and whatever the nationality or residence or domicile of their owners may be:
o

(b) In relation to all claims, wheresoever arising (including, in the case of cargo or wreck salvage, claims in respect of cargo or wreck found on land):
o

(c) So far as they relate to mortgages and charges, to all mortgages or charges, whether registered or not, and whether legal or equitable, and whether fixed or floating, including mortgages and charges created under the law of any other country:

Provided that nothing in this subsection shall be construed as extending the cases in which money or property is recoverable under any of the provisions of the Maritime Transport Act 1994.

I know what he's excited about: the concept of "Bottomry". Sorry to say, its not what you're thinking.

I did mortgage a ship once. Exciting. and we've seized a ship too. you actually go and attach a writ to it. it was cool.

Court is defined as the High Court mostly but there is some jurisdiction in the DC also it appears.

[CookMySock]

From my limited recollection, Admiralty is a jurisdiction in the same way that the courts of Equity were. There are some interesting and spcial rules relating to the way things are done IIRC. Its a pretty specialised area of Lor.

What genius scheme have you concocted, that hinges on your gaining an understanding of this? Enquiring minds...

It is not my scheme. I'm just fishing for like minds on the subject. Yes it is a jurisdiction, apparently an optional one.

If you do not consent to being goverend by, as you put it, "statute law" then you are, it seems to me, free to leave.

Not at all. I was born here. My father and his father were born here. I will come or go of my own free will.

Steve

[CookMySock]

Court is defined as the High Court mostly but there is some jurisdiction in the DC also it appears.

Only when you consent. In the high(?) court, they can rule on common law, and consent is irrelevant.

Steve