ukhrtitle.gif (7568 bytes)

Crime - Organised -Institutionalised - Corruption - Fraud - Protection Rackets, run and managed by judicial chair occupants, in a free-for-all state of abundance. Note the all-embracing guarantee, in place, in contempt of all law:

WHERE IS JUSTICE? Read >>> "The court has inherent jurisdiction to stay an action which must fail; as, for instance an action brought in respect of an act of State" [*Link to founder's tribulations in 1972-75]
And by extension any act of any public servant who is appointed, retained and maintained by other public servants for all of whom, the state, as employer, is ultimately responsible, including abusers of judicial chair occupancy. Hence, the billions paid out as covered in the exclusive affidavit that visitors can link to directly from here. *Link also to the founder's conclusions as of 1972-75 when the great Metropolitan police were seen to be nothing but accessories to and abettors of the rampant fraud and corruption through the courts while Members of Parliament were -as they still do- promoting the waffle that amounts to nothing short of 'independence of the judiciary to act in contempt of ALL LAW (national and international) in a pseudo-democracy. With such a facility in place (the words we point to here) and arrogant abuse of public office, can anyone assert that Mr Andrew Yiannides, the founder of human-rights, was not right to determine that Justice has been abducted and that she is held captive in the dungeons maintained by her abductors who rape her daily in their courts? NOTE : ALL Member States of the European Union are subject to the ruling which visitors, readers and researchers can access in the explicit page /yourrights.htm [*Link to the realities - in due course also a link to the warning (indirect but nonetheless very clear) for thinkers to recognise >>> On 3rd March 2008 - someone's birthday <<< we released a House of Lords PRECEDENT CASE and reveal deliberations by their Lordships in respect of FRAUD - DECEPTION - CONSPIRACY & IMPLIED LIES BY KEEPING SILENT about any wrong imposed on any other >>> IN THE MEANTIME WE have been naming and shaming a number who know of & do much more than just approve wrongs imposed on millions of 'serfs' in our allegedly civilised country / state / province / district of the European Union that allegely protects 'citizens from FRAUD & CORRUPTION. Needless to say the case entailed activities and practices by solicitors as Mr Andrew Yiannides was subjected to, decades later, by an old school friend, Mr Kypros Nichola of Nicholas & Co. in London. Mr K. Nichola bluntly abused the trust placed in him and indulged, in tandem with others, in criminal activities intended to cause the damages that were imposed on the targeted 'serf' by acredited - by the Law Society & Bar Council - allegedly Honourable Officers of the Supreme Court, the courts maintained by successive elected governments in the United Kingdom, one of many pseudodemocracies. In due course another revelation relevant to the arrogant 'inherent jurisdiction', through which to deny, obstruct justice & impose all manner of criminally created states on 'the serfs', who are taxed for the cost of maintaining criminals in public office, in pseudo-democracies]

RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STATE OF AFFAIRS, successive irresponsible Lord Chancellors and Home Secretaries who ignored all complaints and submissions irrespective of the evidence and the law pointed to, by the victims of it all, the citizens who are called upon to pay taxes for the maintenance of criminals in public office. [*Link to our exclusive page, covering confidential fraud as arranged THROUGH THE BEST KEPT OPEN SECRET in alleged democracies, European States. Elsewhere the foundations and corner stone upon which the operatives built the societies of their making using the bricks and mortar we cover in this and other pages. The visitor should not be under any illusion that the stars in the theatrical productions, covered in our pages were by any stretch of the imagination 'humans' who were / are gifted with any attributes that distinguish 'true humans' (thinkers) from animals]

Fraud in court Council Forgeries Misconduct in Public Office. 2 cases relative to applicable law One Protocol says it ALL It betrays arrogant intentions Law Provides for THEFTS and it covers Judges too Judges' duties   TIME 4 CHANGE  & CHALLENGES Site CONTENTS - Table of Contents & ongoing work Your Rights & OBLIGATIONS to Society SITE SEARCH facility for any specific element / issue of concern to visitors / readers
COURTS : their Facilities Abused For ORGANISED CRIME >FRAUD< Solicitor's Perjury & Victim Ignores it all Just like the Law Society always does Blackmailed or is it Just Conditioned & Subjugated Victims who join the club ? We name Lovers of blunt fraud through courts - Users of the facilities 4 illicit gains Local Authorities & FRAUD on 'serfs' the Taxpayers who are kept in the dark Police Party to & Endorsing Criminal Acts, Activities Arrogant Fraud FALSE Records & Contempt of Law by the legal Circles & Public Services The crafty ones & Vexatious Litigant PLOYS for the rewarded silent

* Information FOR victims who wish to co-operate by EXPOSING & CHALLENGING abusers of Public Office *

family.uk-human-rights justiceraped.org dadscare.htm theyknow.htm contract.htm sheknows.htm forward.htm converts.htm
MensAid solicitorsfromhell.co.uk confraud.htm solfraud.htm 4deceit.htm convicti.htm chancellor.htm dssfraud.ht

December 2006 - SUMMONS ISSUED & SERVED IN RESPECT OF FRAUDULENT & CORRUPT ACTIVITIES IN FAMILY COURTS (*Link *Link also from here to a case when the abusers of the courts' facilities abandoned their plans for the targeted family)

IMPORTANT INFORMATION for all victims of malpractice - misconduct - negligence, etc. TO NOTE

In the civil justice system in England and Wales, a judge presides over the proceedings that are argued by the opposing sides through the adversarial process. The process enables the court, judge, to reach a conclusion as to the truth of the facts in dispute. Thereat it is for the judge to apply the law to the facts proven, established at court.

The system as evolved is covered in the page 'English Legal System' and remains the same after the Woolf reforms.

An explicit Affidavit plus exhibits and
     letters to a Chief Inspector of Police,
          one to solicitors and another to the Lord Chancellor evince
               ORGANISED CRIMES
(access and read the letter to the police in September 2006)
Access & read from one of a number of letters to the Prime Minister : * I believe that New Labour will deliver us from the wrongs we have been suffering for far too long. Use of our resources in terms of human potential and capabilities can and should be channelled through rights not wrongs, through positives not through negatives. It is our produce and ingenuity we can sell to others not the minefields of corrupt and bankrupt public services. * [*Link from here to the page, note the steps taken to ensure the Prime Minister forwarded / delegated submissions and evidence received at 10 Downing Street to the right Minister / Ministry because the submissions were in respect of ORGANISED CRIMES

 

transcr1.htm        Page KEY 

PageChanges 12 Dec. 2005

import.gif (1348 bytes)

HELP US TO HELP YOU Please (*Link to plea).

hrbnrsml.gif (1162 bytes)

JOIN others On Line and publish your Statement of Facts and the Evidence you have. (Member's case lodged at the European Court on Human Rights - paves the way TO PLEAD VIOLATIONS caused through blunt abuse of the courts in allegedly civilised Democratic States. Victims do not know that IT IS ALL ORGANISED BY the very circles who have been arranging all of humanity's TRIBULATIONS  FOR THOUSANDS of years) Use your rights in law (*Link) and ACT, with others, against the offenders. Join with others and chip in for the creation of the mass of evidence against abusers of public office : the abductors and rapists of Justice. You can then benefit from THE FACTS & THE EVIDENCE that you will help establish. It can all be used in any action, severally or jointly with others, as the case may be. Crimes against humanity are not ruled out when a large number of citizens can come up with evidence and as victims concur and or expand upon on the FACTS STATED & The VIOLATIONS PLEADED as LODGED at the ECoHR, already

The image of the order below EVINCES THE FACT  that as soon as a victim used his rights to PUBLISH & EXPOSE the offending Public Servants who abused the facilities of the courts for Constructive Frauds and CONVERSION OF ASSETS & PROPERTIES TO THE LEGAL CIRCLES, they acted.
wsfltarr.jpg (65011 bytes)
Visitors / researchers NOTE: The victim after setting up a home page, as a member of the Community on Line simply sent out a press release about his *crookjudges* Web Site. Without any application, by the victim (so he informed Mr Yiannides) A MIRACLE : he received  the above Court Order. It was rushed out to him, granting him permission for LEAVE TO APPEAL. DO NOTE, please, the date at the right hand corner, bottom of the document. LOOK also at the date when date stamped. It is obvious that the hand written order WAS RUSHED OUT first thing in the morning before changing the date in the rubber stamp. A Miracle 20th century style, we are sure all will agree, and there exist plenty of charlatans & stooges who are running around 'selling and promoting the practices as maintenance engineers who INFLUENCE SHYSTERS and or INVITE lovers of fraud to indulge with them in the very same practices we cover in the exclusive page which NONE OF THE ALLEGED VICTIMS who contacted us over the last 13 years addressed, for obvious, to us, reasons. (*Link to the exclusive page where we expose the blunt & arrogant CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUDS THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS FACILITIES & NOTE that the beneficiary of the above miracle was the person who introduced the victims /  stars of the case related in this page to Mr Andrew Yiannides). 

Key - PAGE ELEMENTS
VISITOR please READ this
BRIEF introduction to page
INTRODUCTION - overview
WHY Leave to Appeal was... The BUBBLE IS BURSTING
FALSE INSTRUMENTS
In Contempt of EVIDENCE 
Case STRUCK OUT 
Contempt to EVIDENCE 
In Contempt of ARTICLE 6
Contempt to LAW 
FORGERIES USED 4 FRAUD
Need to APPEAL - FRAUD
OBSTRUCTING Examination
Public Servants to ACCOUNT  TRUE Democracy - definition
Obstruct / HINDER Appeals Processes Posted LATE

C
ases/Sites by Element
Contempt to Evidence
Haringey Police - H/B Fraud
V. B. Foden - Mortgage
V. B. Fodder - Divorce
V. B. Foden-Solicitor Case
Contempt to Law
Enfield Council - C.Court
Hackney Council - C.Court
Haringey Council - C.Court
Haringey Police - H/B Fraud
Len Miskulin - Divorce
V. B. Foden - Mortgage
False Instruments - List
Len Miskulin - Divorce
P. Constantinou - Divorce
Johan M R Foenander- Divorce

Forgery Used
V. B. Foden - Financial
Haringey Council-H/B Fraud
PERJURY - Used
V.B. Foden-Solicitor Case
Obstruct - Examination
P. Constantinou - Divorce
Obstructing Justice
Crown Prosecution Service
Court of Appeal - R.B.Del C
part 3     
Strike Out
Helen Patey - Assertions
Divorce Frauds Challenged
V. B. Foden - Plymouth
part 4     

 

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPTS - Scenario One * Page created December 2006 *
undercon.gif (286 bytes) *Page Revised: October 30, 2008*
Site under reconstruction - ongoing improvements with additional material to site & pages
Guidelines on Navigating through the extensive material: access instructions. In the alternative IF looking for any specific issue/issues USE the Site search facility.

As part of the reconstruction process our new pages and pages where changes and additions have been implemented, the improved / amended pages are endorsed with the link 'Page Changes and the date of the last changes. The link takes visitors to a List of the changes implemented in the page. These include new material and links from relevant paragraphs to other or new relevant material in other pages. For further clarification email: webmaster@

VISITORS ARE URGED to access and READ THE IMPORTANT update and ADDENDA we were obliged to introduce in January 2002. We had no choice but to REPORT THE CRIMES TO THE TREASURY. Our observations and knowledge of the constructive frauds made us accessories if we kept quiet, like the alleged victims who work towards the implementation of the schemes by the abductors and rapists of Justice, the Goddess. You will find the addenda statement at the top of the Updated Pages File. We are sure that you will share with us our concerns and most profound disappointment at and with persons who adopt and promote activities which they know are nothing but downright crimes. We refer to our exclusive page where we expose (as conscientious law abiding citizens) the Confidentiality Between Fraudsters that exists care of the BEST OPEN SECRET. 

  • We urge victims, readers and researchers to acquaint themselves with the facts of life stated in *The Breeding Grounds - case* [*Link from here to the relevant page].
  • Victims, citizens who are treated as 'serfs', taxpayers in general need to get tuned to the activities they fall prey to, when they seek 'Justice' in the United Kingdom, as in other pseudodemocracies.
  • In the absence of such other knowledge, persons who read of the 'orchestrated scenario below' will be faced with a dilemma, whether to accept or not to accept the simple fact that the scenario for the day, at Barnet County Court, was intended for one and one only purpose: *To process to fruition the fraudulently created awards to the legal circles'*.
  • We urge all taxpayers to access also the page where we state the realities born of such abuse and WHAT THE ABUSE LEADS TO.
  • We expose it all in the exclusive page where we relate the 'bait & condition', intended to cause the conditioned victims of the courts -and the legal circles- to convert to promoters and maintenance engineers of the system operated by alleged servants of the public and 'the law'.
  • No human : no 'thinker' : no 'grey matter user' could possibly overlook the issue of 'targeted serfs' who elect to ignore the taxpayers' contributions used for REWARDS TO PERSONS WHO ELECT TO IGNORE THE LAW & CO-OPERATE WITH THE ABUSERS OF THE COURTS FACILITIES.
  • We refer to the subjugated, to the conditioned and to programmed robots; to non-thinkers, to persons who AGREE TO KEEP IT ALL IN THE FAMILY CLOSET, to shove it all under the carpets, to suppress it all from the taxpayers, just like the media Barons and the Intellectual Prostitutes they retain and maintain do. [*Link from here to the page where we point to the plans of the creators of such states and societies]
  • Through the above realities / realisations the creation of societies as intended and planned for by the criminals who are and have been in control for far too long.
  • We refer to the making of societies which the media dare to misrepresent as allegedly civilised Democratic States; States that allegedly rest and are founded on principles of law and order! [*Link from here to the part of the transcript, below, when District Judge Stephenson was challenged to stand down BECAUSE SHE WAS ACTING IN CONTEMPT OF THE LAW]
In brief, you will be reading, in this page of:
  • The arrogant abuse of County Court facilities for the imposition of legal costs awards, CREATED THROUGH ABUSE OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS with blunt participation : 'care of failures to challenge and expose the administrators' of the Employment Tribunals' facilities', who engaged in 'the fraudulently created costs awards'... as the participating, alleged challengers, the husband of the victim and 'the victim at the mercy of the creators of the scenarios and theatrical productions arrognatly intended to lead to the reward scenario we point to and expose in the exclusive page, which page the alleged victims failed to address, and refer to, in any exchanges with us or openly with third parties.
  • The only interests the parties were engaging in, was the process attached to the fraudulently created costs awards through the facilities in place leading to REWARDS TO THE PARTICIPANTS, to persons who play the field with and as organised by the criminals who have been and are in control of the courts and the legal services in a pseudo-democracy. [*Link from here to a reminder for and to fraudsters, we name and expose in our pages, to persons who crossed the border].
  • The evil practices that court staff and officers systematically engage in, THUS WITH INTENT SEEN TO BE INDULGING IN FRAUD THROUGH PERVERSION OF JUSTICE. (NOTE: By the nature of their appointments to such public office THEY ALL KNOW THAT THE ACTIVITIES, WE POINT TO, AMOUNT to criminal / indictable offences and constitute violations of the most fundamental of 'assured' human rights, in any civilised society).
  • The most basic of rudiments and fundamental principles that should be in place for PROPER DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE {*Link to a short list where the MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENTS are pointed to, among them the right to call to book, to account to the PUBLIC FOR ANY ACT OR ACTIVITY and performance of public servants, in the execution of their DUTIES TO THE PUBLIC, the taxpayers].
  • The STATEMENT OF FACTS and the VIOLATIONS PLEADED as lodged with and at the European Court of Human Rights, as settled by the founder of *human-rights* Mr. Andrew Yiannides. Many the allegedly concerned 'leaders of victim groups of the legal circles and the police who shoved their heads in the sand, as typical lovers of the system of operations in place. Needless to say the very same circles ignoring the billions squandered and stolen through the practices and ploys we cover in our pages. [*Link to the exclusive page where we expose and cover the billions of taxpayers' contributions which the aforesaid 'lovers of the system as is', in reality work for. They do so, for a cut in the artificially created frauds on the budget. The cost of such activities always met by Mr & Mrs Average, the citizens who are called upon to meet it all through taxes].

As we prepare for more revelations about the institutionally organised fraud and corruption the citizens fall prey to, some official statement provides us with the assurances that the recognition of the issue of organised crime is not far from the mind of our government. This is as good a page as any where we can report and draw attention to the words of the Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. Tony Blair when he returned from the Summit attended by the leaders of member states of the European Union, in Holland, in June 2005. The Prime Minister when addressing the House of Commons on his return, stated:

"The United Kingdom, will work to resolve the impasse on the EU budget". He also defended his decision to reject a compromise deal at a Summit meeting the previous week. He spoke of and reiterated, to Parliament, his belief that: "The European Common Agricultural Policy and the United Kingdom's rebate should be reviewed together".

He carried on: "This rebate must be examined. This crisis is not about the failure of Europe's leaders to reach agreement, with each other. The crisis is about that of Europe's Leaders to reach agreement with the people of Europe on issues that concern them; economically and socially; and they want answers to the challenges they face. They worry about globalisation and organised crime, and they do not, at present, see Europe giving a credible response. If we answer these concerns Europe will strengthen and we need a strong Europe to bolster the strength of individual nations. It is those who believe in Europe most who should be 'the most ardent advocates at changing it'. The European budget shouldn't be separate from that debate but part of it, and it is that debate which we will look forward to, in our presidency".

When answering a question on the issue of the Constitution, he said that: "It could not proceed after the recent rejections in the French and Dutch referendums". The UK taking over the Presidency of the European Union on 1st July 2005.

NOTE: We are certain that the Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. Tony Blair, will also be attending to the issue of the billions plundered annually and squandered, as organised by abusers of the courts facilities to which activities WE HAVE BEEN POINTING FOR FAR TOO LONG. We are sure that with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Rt. Hon. Gordon Brown, they will first see to it that, at home, we are rid of the practices, that parasites and hypocrites impose on Mr & Mrs Average through abuse of public office, WHILE AWARE OF THE LAW APPLICABLE IN SUCH SCENARIOS, as all .

Above the visitor, reader, researcher reads of ORGANISED CRIME, as spoken of by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons when he returned from the Summit of EU leaders, in June 2005.

  • Visitors and victims of the abused legal system and the courts' facilities are invited to access the page where we published a couple of contracts. One was sent to Mr Andrew Yiannides in respect of a proposed and shot documentary which the producer stated was intended for other specific purposes and use for, NOT as the contract submitted after the shooting of the documentary was seeking from the person who created this website resting on 33 years research and work by 2005. [*Link to the page where we published the submitted contract and information in respect of the proposed and SHOT documentary, which matters the proponent intended to use for other purposes than what the 'producer had spoken of to Mr Andrew Yiannides].   
  • We released  below, in December 2006, the images of the explicit transcript printed pages as received by fax from Mrs Grace Theodorou, the victim of unfair dismissal from work and of abusers of judicial chair occupation at the Employment Tribunal.
  • We did so in order to draw attention to the obvious:- (a) WHY proceed with issue of an allegedly legitimate judgement, in contempt of the rules of procedure & SIMPLY IN LINE with the only purpose for the alleged legitimate cause for an application to Barnet County Court? (b) WHY FAIL TO CHALLENGE & EXPOSE in the public domain the abuse of the Employment Tribunal's facilities care of reckless abandon of, and contempt to their obligations to Society at large, to the taxpayers IF NOT PARTY TO THE THEATRICAL PRODUCTIONS & PRESENTATIONS, aiming for the cash under the table arrangements for persons who adopted and adopt the practices? (c) Why did Mr Kazamias, the husband of the victim(!) visit Mr Yiannides and threatened him in the presence of witnesses after the victims were informed that the transcript would be released in the public domain by uk-human-rights.org IF THE VICTIMS(!) carried on failing to co-operate and do so themselves? (*F2)
  • We released, below, on New Year's day 2008, the text of the transcript as organised / arranged by the abuser of the County Court's facilities, District Judge Stephenson (*F3). We acted so in order to create and provide links to and from the issues covered by the content of the transcript.
  • We urge visitors, readers and researchers to read it all. It relates to organised constructive frauds through abuse of the Employment Tribunals facilities and an alleged challenger, the husband of the victim who instituted proceedings for wrongful dismissal against her employers.
  • The victim and her husband were introduced to Mr. Andrew Yiannides, by an otherwise pre-occupied member of the Community on Line. To all intends and purposes, the husband of the victim had been and was in 'command and control of the case' when the two made contact with Mr Andrew Yiannides & uk-human-rights.org
  • Apparently the couple had suffered from the usual denial of rights and freedoms to abuse judicial chair occupation at the Employment Tribunal 's facilities. Both presented the usual residual effects inherent in all cases Mr Andrew Yiannides encountered over the last 15 plus years since (late May 1992) the days when the managers / controllers & organisers of the LIPS crowd/mob contacted him with their plans for use of the system and its victims.
  • All visitors and readers of the material facts and realities we point to and expose in our pages, should note that the aforesaid contact by the managers / organisers of the LIPS crowd/mob, was made within two weeks of the lodging of the explicit appeal at Bow County Court, by the 'targeted serf', Mr Andrew Yiannides. [*Link to the clearly stated realities and the challenges covered in the appeal referred to here].
  • In the left margin / window we publish and release an intriguing Court Order and we state how it came about, miraculously!
  • The 'beneficiary', thereafter, failed to take any steps that could be looked upon by 'thinkers' (*F4) ('humans', not the run of the mill indoctrinated zombies or morons, not typical sons of men who are conditioned by the agents of the abductors and rapists of Democracy & Justice) as steps intended to build upon the obvious:
  • The abusers of public office, are aware of the fact that 'the bubble is bursting' and, 'their criminal activities are no longer subject to 'the protection racket managed by the fraudsters who control the media'.
  • We include the Intellectual Prostitutes whom the controllers of the media retain simply to promote the RECKLESS plans of the abductors and rapists of Justice. (*Links to the plans, an introduction and extension to the material facts covered in the page /protocol.htm and request of visitors to read first the latter).
  • Needless to say the very media circles are seen to be operating as the abductors and rapists of Democracy, yet they have for decades been trumpeting much ado about the allegedly civilised states of Democratic governance that allegedly rest and are founded on principles of law and order.
  • The 'beneficiary' of the order we publish above, in the left margin panel, 'amazingly defaulted, for years, to act as the occasion commanded' of a victim(?) of the legal circles. He treated his endorsement of OUR AIMS as of no relevance, even though he subscribed to the statement of intent, 'as a concerned victim' of crook judges (his choice of website / domain name).  However he did busy himself in court application after application on issues that did not relate to what he had personally suffered from along with his sister and two brothers.
  • Somehow the beneficiary, engaged in other activities indicative of a person who entertained notions that the work for human-rights, by Mr Andrew Yiannides, could have been railroaded and hijacked by arrogant *fraudsters club recruits* and 'lovers / promoters / maintenance engineers of 'the arrangements in place FOR CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUDS ON THE TAXPAYERS' intended to lead to *corruption of conditioned morons*.
  • Visitors / readers should access the page where we publish evidence = PRESS RELEASES by the government whereby the 'compensation bill' runs into BILLIONS ANNUALLY. Needless to say the bill includes *the confidential rewards, for playing the field with the managers and controllers of the legal system and 'the courts' business'. [*Link to an explicit affidavit that was received by the following fraudsters club recruits years ago: Mr Norman Scarth, Mr Maurice Kellett and Mr Paul Talbot-Jenkins, it was also referred to seen by Mr Johan Michael Richard Foenander]

...

The right to reply and to justify the behaviour, the activities and the most intriguing of defaults and omissions we cover and point to in our pages (as in this page we do) is assured to any one we name. We will publish excuses & whatever is submitted to us. Legal argument that shall arise out of their submissions will be used as we apply ourselves to relevant issues in the cases they referred to us & we will cover their acts and all their defaults. [*Link to a case when the victim (!) VBH  IGNORED perjury by a solicitor]

This page is dedicated to all abusers of our time and in particular to two evil mongering fraudsters, Mrs Veronica Beryl Foden and Mrs Helen Patey. Both contacted us as 'victims' who, allegedly, were faced with very serious problems. The former complained that she had been subjected to the most horrendous of violations and obstructions to her rights. The most contemptuous of fraudulent activities, in the courts, were noted upon inspection of her files. She needed Andrew's assistance to challenge it all, all the way to the ECoHR (Strasbourg) and she declared her intentions to expose it all with our assistance, as a human-rights.org Community in Line member. However, it was not long before her actions and convenient defaults, established that she was part of a scam. She had been a participating fraudster in all that she was complaining of and about. She even engaged in criminally motivated activities that were intended to cause damages to Mr Andrew Yiannides, whom she was sent along to mess about with. The other, Mrs Helen Patey, was sent along by persons who operate as 'lovers of the system as is'. All excel in the subliminal indoctrination tactics, subjugating the victims they contact, are pointed to', to nothing but relentless waffle and complaints about the circles they complain of and accuse as the architects of their suffering..... when in fact they are seen to be acting as PERFECT SPECIMENS OF Sadomasochists who fell prey to and in love of the arrogant double constructive frauds on 'the serfs', 'the citizens who pay taxes for the CREATION OF SUCH MONSTERS through abuse of the courts processes and facilities. All, incidentally, too eager and ready to promote all manner of opinions about the Free Masons, without ANY PROOF, in support of their opinions and aspersions. The person who introduced 'the couple' / victims(!) of the abused Employment Tribunal facilities, noted to have been engaging in all manner of EXTENSIVE USE OF THE INTERNET, ONLY FOR OTHER ISSUES clearly intended to draw attention to activities the person allegedly objected to. YET CONVENIENTLY FAILING TO RELEASE / PUBLISH  ANY EVIDENCE or legal arguments in the public domain - HIS PERSONAL WEBSITE where he was to CHALLENGE OPENLY the abusers of judicial chair occupation, THOSE WHO CONVERTED THE LEGACY FROM A FATHER TO HIS FOUR OFFSPRING, to allegedly legitimate legal costs. [*Link to the person's 'promises' at his web-site after he was made aware that Helen Patey (pointed to above) was challenged because of her failures to CHALLENGE & EXPOSE the abusers of Judicial Chair occupation. She came along to complain of and about such matters while promoting unsubstantiated complaints and claiming to have been 'simply the victim of the Freemason*, typical of all associates and affiliates of the puke production machine, James Todd of VOMIT repute. AS ACCOMPLISHED LOVERS & PROMOTERS OF THE POWERS THAT BE, care of the FRAUDULENT INTENTIONS of 'the sold to the system as is, FOR MORE OF THE SAME CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES in a pseudodemocracy]       

The images of the printed transcript (pages) and the content / text we publish below with links to and from the text should assist readers, researchers and victims of the system of operations, in the courts, to recognise the validity of our stance on the issue of FRAUD IMPOSED THROUGH ABUSE OF THE COURTS' FACILITIES, leading to the corruption of morons who fall to the system of operations they engage in, as devious and evil, as those they set off complaining of and about, to begin with, ubsequently simply emulating them, as alleged legal gurus. [*F1]

The performance of the participants, especially the victims of 'the activities at the Employment Tribunal, inclusive of the deliberate obstructions to unadulterated court proceedings', and in particular the convenient defaults by 'the victims' (!), are most important in the instance at hand, bearing in mind the reckless violations they were pointed to WHICH THEY ELECTED TO SHOVE & BURY in the dark corners of their 'confused / corrupted mind-set'.

WHAT PRECEDED THE THEATRICAL PRODUCTION, - for the day of *the hearing*, as the abuser of judicial chair occupation dare refer to the events of the day, in Barnet County Court - WAS AND REMAINS MOST IMPORTANT. Reference in the transcript to a document submitted and lodged with the court's office prior to being called in, FOR the purposes of the organisers of the fraudulent in intent proceedings as of the instigation of the claim against the employers of the 'the victim' who was sucked into / turned to an alleged Defendant care of the abused court facilities, WHICH FACILITIES & ACTIVITIES her protector / husband, alleged legal guru / assistant / advisor WILFULLY & WITH INTENT WAS FAILING FOR MONTHS TO CHALLENGE & EXPOSE as another aspiring fraudsters club recruit, such as others we are naming and exposing in our pages. 

We point to relevant practices that are intended, most definitely, to obstruct justice and to deny rights which, to all intents and purposes are assured through Statutory Law and International Treaties & Accords. Yet no such law and facilities do not exist, WHILE THE CRIMINALS IN CONTROL OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM & THE COURTS INDULGE IN THE ARROGANTLY ORGANISED FRAUDS COVERED IN THE EXCLUSIVE PAGE, which page, alleged victims and media barons recklessly elected and elect to shove in the dark corners of their corrupted minds.

However, no diligent reader / researcher or victim of abuse of Public Office can overlook the arrangements in place. Such 'elements' as the one attached to the undisclosed 'provisions by judicial chair occupants' happen to be in contempt of all law. Thereby the criminals who ARE in control establish the fallacy of the promotions about alleged Democratic governance and alleged rule of law & order, as sold to the otherwise indoctrinated and misled citizens by the Hypocrites and Sycophants who ARE in control in all pseudo-democracies.

Case - Partiestraha01r.jpg (62646 bytes) Link to Page1 texttraha02r.jpg (135940 bytes) Link to Page2 text
traha03r.jpg (101305 bytes)
On the left parties and venue for the day, at Barnet County Court. Pages 1, 2, 3 relate to the issue of 'who shall speak for 'the Defendant'. The 'Defendant' just a victim of 'unfair dismissal from work; and, worse, victim of the abused Employment Tribunal Service, as organised by alleged servants of the law and the public. The 'Defendant' just one of the 'millions of serfs' who fork out taxes for the retainer and maintenance of criminals in public office, including judicial chair occupants such as the director of the show for the day.

Readers, researchers and victims should acquaint themselves with the activities in (a) 'The Breeding Grounds - case' relative to ORGANISED ASSAULT ON A TARGETED SERF (victim) who was caused to challenge far too many FOUL ACTIVITIES BY COURT OFFICERS & STAFF following reckless support for a fraudster (building contractor) who caused DAMAGES TO PROPERTY and an arrogant police constable commanding of 'the targeted victim' to waste funds with solicitors AS IF the activities of the fraudster were just 'civil matters'. [Access from here the explicit appeal that caused one and all to land on planet earth].   

The appeal we point to from above with our complements to the abuser of judicial chair occupation; also to the actors who may had been the victims of the usual 'organised fraud on the serfs', through abuse of the courts facilities, initially. They conveniently engaged in far too many defaults and omissions relative to the ABSOLUTE NEED TO CHALLENGE & EXPOSE OPENLY, in the public domain, on the INTERNET, abusers of public office, after they contacted Mr Andrew Yiannides. They were directed by another victim of the constructive frauds bluntly indulged into by the legal circles through  abuse of the courts' facilities, as at the Employment Tribunal in the instance at hand. [*Link to evidence on the realities of life in a pseudodemocracy]
Link to Page3 text
traha04r.jpg (141638 bytes)
Link to Page4 text
traha05r.jpg (129732 bytes)
Link to Page5 text
traha06r.jpg (161422 bytes)
Among the parties invited to the show (Pages 3 & 4), Mr Andrew Yiannides. He did so on the condition that 'the victims' who deliberately failed to access, print and submit to the abusers of the Employment Tribunal facilities, succinctly stated CHALLENGES that were PUBLISHED IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN (for years) should act AS THE LAW COMMANDS of law-abiding citizens : Report & Challenge CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES. The challenges and the facts covered in the public domain were RELEVANT TO WHAT HAD BEEN ON LINE FOR THE VICTIMS (?) and the published challenges were founded / rested on use of rights that are assured under Articles 9, 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. From the onset the victims HAD BEEN POINTED to the provisions covered by Article 29 of The Combined Treaties of the European Union. They failed to recognise the hint, and their blunt failures to act as 'the theatrics they were party to (immaterial if victims or co-operating illiterates in law) evinced their true colours. Their failures to use their rights made it clear that ALL THEY WERE INTERESTED IN WERE THE REWARDS UNDER THE TABLE covered and pointed to in our exclusive page, which page, like all other lovers of the system of operations through the courts, THEY CONVENIENTLY FAILED TO ADDRESS. [*Link to page]

The condition referred to above, was that 'the victims' should simply set up their own web-pages / web-site where they SHOULD EXPOSE the activities they had been subjected to, also the arrogant contempt for the law and the rules of procedure which abusers of judicial chair occupation, at the Employment Tribunal engaged in. It had been agreed, as of first contact, that 'the victims' concluded that judicial chair occupants had been acting as absolute masters who treated and treat appointment to judicial office as Exempt From and Not Subject To Parliament's Law. The victims were pointed to the provisions of International Treaties and Accords, to which the United Kingdom subscribes to, as an allegedly civilised state and member of the European Union. The victims were also pointed to explicit provisions under the European Union relative to Fraud & Corruption, after their attention had been drawn first to the exclusive page [*Link to page] where ORGANISED FRAUD & CORRUPTION through abuse of the courts facilities was and is being exposed by us. The hint had been ignored by 'the victims' for far too long by the date of the theatrical production at Barnet County Court. [*Link to explicit provisions under Article 29 of the Combined Treaties of the European Union]

Leading up to the application 'for enforcement of the awards to the solicitors' representing the employer of the victim, the victims benefited from assistance to create a website (*FXXXXX) where they were to state THEIR EXPERIENCES, their views and their opinions in respect of the theatrical productions at the Employment Tribunals. In the early hours of the morning (of the production at Barnet County Court) Mr Yiannides was taken to the residence of the victims; there he settled for the day a document which Mr Kazamias was informed he (Mr K) was to be lodging at court and thereafter he was to use as 'his notes for the oral submissions to the court, for the purposes of the 'hearing' of the day. When handing the document to the office staff, the clerk 'miraculously failed to rubberstamp the copy correctly; only the date was transferred to the document and the Barnet County Court was NOT. Mr Kazamias was asked to return to the office and ask the clerk to 'use the rubber stamp CORRECTLY'. When referring to the list for hearings before D.J. Stephenson it was noted that five cases were listed all of which were to be dealt with between 10.30 am and 12.00 noon; in other words 5 x 20 minute cases in under 18 minutes each, and in the circumstances Mr Kazamias was asked to secure a copy of the list from the office staff. I need not ask any of the visitors to this page IF they secured the said copy, because that is precisely what Mr Kazamias failed to do.

Link to Page6 text
traha07r.jpg (121602 bytes)
Link to Page7 text
traha08r.jpg (159219 bytes)
Link to Page8 text
traha09r.jpg (171681 bytes)

References to a letter sent to the court by the beneficiaries of the constructively engineered rewards, to them, by abusers of 'judicial chair occupation', in contempt of all applicable law and the rules of procedure in courts. NOTHING UNUSUAL, simply CIUKU Enterprises (Crimes Incorporated United Kingdom Unlimited) in full swing. And the victims suppressing, from the public, the criminal activities they were victims of, JUST AS THE MEDIA BARONS DO. Of such realities the agents and followers of organised crimes against 'the serfs / the taxpayers', did boast in explicit material that also relates to HOW THEY WERE / HAD BEEN / ARE ORGANISING everything in the type of pseudodemocracies we write of; and 'the serfs' called upon to pay taxes for the maintenance of tutored / used stooges, illiterates in law, as the front line soldiers & the lap-dogs of the criminals in control. The conditioned & subjugated to such frauds as ill educated morons & the subjected to such activities, falling in love with the cash under the table REWARDS TO PERSONS WHO ENJOIN WITH THE abusers of the courts facilities ACTING AS SUBLIMINAL INDOCTRINATION OPERATIVES  WHOSE ONLY INTERESTS HAPPEN TO BE PROMOTION & USE OF THE FACILITIES in place for rampant constructive frauds & CORRUPTION OF ILLITERATES IN LAW.

Link to Page9 text
traha10r.jpg (138100 bytes)
Link to Page10 text
traha11r.jpg (131444 bytes)
Link to Page11 text
traha12r.jpg (126961 bytes)
Link to Pae12 text
traha13r.jpg (106559 bytes)
Link to Page13 text
traha14r.jpg (104755 bytes)
A Judgement
traha15r.jpg (61163 bytes)
JPage1 [P1]
traha16r.jpg (204989 bytes)
JPage2 [P2]
traha17r.jpg (245988 bytes)
JPage3 [P3]
traha18r.jpg (142112 bytes)
Below, MOST IMPORTANT issues to be noted and taken on board by victims, readers and researchers, when considering the content of the transcript we release and publish below in HTML format text, for links to and from.
1. The usher was given the names of all parties who were to attend the under 20 minutes 'hearing / theatrical production', and Mr Andrew Yiannides spelled his surname for the occasion. The District Judge 'approved' the transcript which Mrs Theodorou transmitted to Mr Yiannides soon after 'the victims' received the original from the court. District Judge Stephenson must have been given the list of attendees as the exchanges with the attendees, evince. Most convenient indeed that the letter *i* went walkies and most essential that the spelling HAD to be corrected for the purposes of the release of the content in text in this page and for access on the Internet. (*F3)
2. The transcript was simply put in motion by an abuser of judicial chair occupation because the person's only objective for the day was to issue an Enforcement Order resting and founded on the fraudulent proceedings within the Employment Tribunals. Interestingly the victims who were introduced to human-rights and Mr Andrew Yiannides appeared most definitely to have been playmates, through defaults to challenge and expose the abusers of public office : NOTHING UNUSUAL WHEN IT COMES TO PERSONS WHO FELL IN LOVE WITH THE SYSTEM. Only illiterates in law, non intellectuals and NON-THINKERS could possibly fail to recognise why Mr Kazamias indulged as he did and why he maintained the attitude of NON-DISCLOSURE & EXPOSURE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN the issue of *abused public office AND TRUST* ((*Like all 'fraudsters club recruits and lovers of the cash under the table', we name and expose, the 'manager of the victim's case and rights at law, noted to be operating as any other chasing the rewards facility for persons who are 'persuaded' to play by the rules of the abductors and rapists of Justice AND DEMOCRACY*. Such persons as lovers/users of the system as is failing with intent to ensure the electorate and taxpayers ARE MADE AWARE OF THE RAMPANT FRAUD THROUGH THE COURTS leads to uninformed taxpayers including their own offspring. And the criminals who are in control, mismanaging and organising the lives and future of 'the serfs' in our country -as in other pseudodemocracies- simply aimed and plan for our offspring to be paying excessive taxes, for decades, towards the interest charged by the financiers and criminals in control of pseudodemocracies. OUR CHILDREN WILL BE PAYING TAXES towards the repayment of the 'loans to governments' that are constituted of actors and marionettes, persons who are dangling on the strings of their manipulators and the greedy for power over others seekers. And, in the meantime, bloated-brains like our hero.... our hero.... our hero.... as mentally blind (self imposed state) and as devious as they come. Such issues and realities are covered (supported with evidence) in the explicit page where we used a letter from the deceitful abuser of trust. [*Link to the page where we publish evidence in support of the logical answers to many of the inexcusable and failures of the hero, and his associates from within the LIPS crowd/mob to consider their OBLIGATION TO SOCIETY, to the taxpayers].
3. The 'victims' benefited through abuse of trust and the element 'benefit of doubt' as of the moment Mr Kazamias FAILED to download and submit to the abusers of Public Office at the Employment Tribunal, challenges and evidence published in the Public Domain in our pages in accordance with the provisions of the European Convention of Human Rights. The failures simply pointing to the fact that the 'alleged victim-challengers' were NOT in any way going to challenge and EXPOSE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN THE ABUSED FACITIES at the EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS. Period.
 

 

Fax           18 Aug  ’05  12:11 P.01

IN THE BARNET COUNTY COURT
Claim No. 4BT06288
1 July 2005

Before:

DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON

GEMSTAR DEVELOPMENT LIMITED Claimant

-V-

MRS GRACE THEODOROU Defendant

The CLAIMANTS did not attend and were not represented

The DEFENDANT was represented by MR KAZAMIAS & Ors (McKenzie Friends)

PROCEEDINGS

Tape transcribed from the official tape recording
Transcribed by
Fiona Shipley Transcription Ltd.
Suite 307a. Third Floor
Park House, Park Street, Croydon CR0 1YE
Telephone 020 8667 9626

Page1

PROCEEDINGS
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Now, Mrs Theodorou, I am District Judge Stephenson. I understand you wish to apply to have the assistance of a McKenzie Friend. That's the expression given to a lay advisor.

You have actually brought in four people with you. It would be very unusual to have four McKenzie Friends. In fact, I myself have never come across a case where somebody has had four McKenzie Friends all at once, so I really want to sort out with you which person is going to be your McKenzie Friend and going to do the main amount of the assisting of you out of the four people who have come in.

Mrs Theodorou I have some names here that have been written down on the slip. I understand there is a Mr Kazamias-
MR KAZAMIAS: Yes.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: - your husband and he's been helping you. Is that right Mrs Theodorou?
MRS THEODOROU: Yes.
MR KAZAMIAS: Yes.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Yes. What is Mr Kazamias's - what, if I can speak to you Mr Kazamias, which is Mr Kazamias?
MR KAZAMIAS: Yes, I am here.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Sorry, I do beg your pardon.
MR KAZAMIAS: Don't worry.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Mr Kazamias, what is your experience of assisting people in Court?
MR KAZAMIAS: I have been helping with this case,
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Yes. Have you ever assisted anybody previously in Court proceedings?
MR KAZAMIAS: No I haven't.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Right.
MR KAZAMIAS: Commercial, yes, but not-
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Never in Court? You have never been in a Court advising anyone?

Page2
MR KAZAMIAS: Not advising as such, no.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Right.
MR KAZAMIAS: But I remember the case from inside two years ago.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Right There is a Mrs Menendez? I don’t know –
MR KAZAMIAS: She’s an observer.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Yes. Well, she’s welcome to do that. There’s a Mr Hamilton?
MR HAMILTON: That’s me.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Is Mr Hamilton here to advise? What are you here for?
MR HAMILTON: I’m here to advise as a lay advisor. Could I go back – you said you had never been in a court where there are several advisors. I recently conducted a case of my own and I, in the court had four lay advisors. The point being they were there to advise me, but I did the lead, I was the lead.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Well, that’s what I was trying to sort out.
MR HAMILTON: It is
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Mr –
MR HAMILTON: I could still advise and take advise from others.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Well, no one is suggesting that Mrs Theodorou can’t have somebody to advise her. I was just trying to sort out who was going to be the spokesman if she needed assistance with speaking.
MR HAMILTON: Well the spokesman will of course be Mr Kazamias.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Right. Mr Hamilton and – what’s your background?

Page3
MR HAMILTON: I have been a lay advisor to numerous people for a couple of years now, I specialise basically in corruption and in employment tribunals. I specialise in corruption in business in the city. I specialise in corruption in MPs in Parliament. I specialise in banking corruption. I specialise in pension corruption.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: You obviously must have quite a following then Mr Hamilton?
MR HAMILTON: I do, yes.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: What’s your full name?
MR HAMILTON: Stephen Hamilton.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Stephen. Your address?
MR HAMILTON: Flat 2e3,, Bath Hill Court, Bournemouth, Dorset.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Thank you very much. Well, Mr Hamilton then you are not going to be spokesman, but you are going to be on hand to advise Mr Kazamias and Mrs Theodorou. Is that right? Have I got the right end of the stick?
MR HAMILTON: Yes, because she is not fully aware of the processes –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Right.
MR HAMILTON: Bt what –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Okay. The other gentleman there? I’ve got down a Mr Yiannides?
MR YIANNIDES: Mr Yiannides, yes, that’s right.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: What are you here for?
MR YIANNIDES: I’m also here to assist as a lay observer and a lay assistant in this process.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Mainly to observe then?
MR YIANNIDES: No, to assist and advise.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: In what way?
MR YIANNIDES: In the process.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: What is your experience Mr Yiannides?
MR YIANNIDES: Well I have been at it for over 30 years.

Page4
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Sorry, what have you been at?
MR YIANNIDES: I have been at it for 30 years.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: At it for 30 –
MR YIANNIDES: Acting for 30 years.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: In Courts?
MR YIANNIDES: In Courts.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: What is your full name and address?
MR YIANNIDES: ANDREW YIANNIDES.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Andrew Yiannides.
MR YIANNIDES: 16a.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: 16a yes?
MR YIANNIDES: Woodside one word.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Woodside?
MR YIANNIDES: Road.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Road.
MR YIANNIDES: London N22 5HU
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Right, well, in order that we don’t have confusion as to who’s what. If Mr Kazamias, if you want to come and sit next to your wife? If the two of you who are going to advise Mrs Theodorou want to arrange yourselves at his shoulders, [Brief discussion between advisors] Yes, yes. Okay. A far as I’m concerned, obviously I don’t want o have lots of people speaking at the once. I take it that Mr Kazamias is going o be the spokesman; that’s just sheer practicality; it’s not because I want to –
MR HAMILTON: Yes, w are all aware of that.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Yes.
MR HAMILTON: I tell you now, it’s not actually – wee are well aware of –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Well in that case Mr Hamilton you don’t need to say anything do you if you are well aware?

Page5
MR HAMILTON: We all are, yes.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Yes. Well that’s very good. So Mrs Theodorou, it's your application which essentially is an application to make an application because I said that you were not to make any further application without permission of the Court. I believe that if you are successful in that application that what you in effect want is the proceedings brought by Gemstar to be stayed. Their solicitors have chosen not to attend today.
MR KAZAMIAS: Is there any particular reason for that?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: They have sent in a long letter to the Court –
MR KAZAMIAS: Please may we have a copy?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: I will arrange for you to have a copy certainly. At the moment I was not aware that you did not have a copy. I would have thought they should have sent one as a courtesy if nothing else. It seems –
MR HAMILTON: Sorry, sorry to but in but –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Mr, Mr -
MR HAMILTON: The reason these proceedings go on
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Mr Hamilton, Mr Hamilton -
MR HAMILTON: - we should be –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Mr Hamilton, be quiet Mr Hamilton it's Mr Kazamias who is going to be spokesman. We sorted that one out. So if he's going to be the spokesman, I'll hear from him. Right. Frankly, the letter I feel doesn't add anything anyway. The matter is purely a procedural one. I have a spare copy because they have sent in both by fax and by document exchange. So if Mr Kazamias, if you want to come and approach me and get a copy?
MR HAMILTON: Could we have a recess to assess that, I mean -
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Mr Kazamias, would you please sort out who is the spokesman?
MR KAZAMIAS: Yes, we would like a recess tot if that's possible, to –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: No, we are not going to have a recess because I'm not going to take any notice of that letter because they're not –
MR KAZAMIAS: Well, it seems you are not taking notice of a lot of things that have been presented.

Page6
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Well that's your opinion –
MR KAZAMIAS: That's my opinion obviously.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: That's your opinion Mr Kazamias, I am not taking into account that letter because they are not here.
MR KAZAMIAS: So you are saying it is false?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: No, I'm not saying it's false. I'm just not taking it into account because they aren’t here.
MR KAZAMIAS: So can we ask the reason why you are not taking this into account?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Sorry?
MR KAZAMIAS: Why you are not taking this into account?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Because they axe not here. It would be inappropriate for me to take into account representations made in a letter Mr Kazamias, by solicitors who failed to serve the letter in advance, which I agree with you they should have done
MR KAZAMIAS: Right.
DISTRICT RIDGE STEPHENSON: - and have failed to attend. So I am simply not attaching any weight to the letter.
MR HAMILTON: But you have read the letter?
MR KAZAMIAS: But you have read the letter, yes?
DISTRICT RIDGE STEPHENSON: I have skimmed the letter. I have not –
MR KAZAMIAS: Skimmed.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Skimmed. No more than skimmed. Right. Now Mr Kazamias, can we move on?
MR KAZAMIAS: Yes.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: What I would really like to do is hear Mrs Theodorou's application. What I am going to do is sit back and leave it to you to address me and put your points.
MR KAZAMIAS: What exactly do you mean by application?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Mrs Theodorou - I struck out any applications that she made and I ordered that she not be permitted to make any further applications

Page7
without permission of the Court. She then attempted to make a further application and I ordered there be a hearing to treat that application as an application for permission. I understand from what she has written into the Court that she wants the proceedings brought by Gemstar struck out.
MR KAZAMIAS: Yes.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: So, Mr Kazamias, what I propose to do is to hear from - well If she wants you to address me rather than her doing it herself, I propose to hear from you.
MR KAZAMIAS: [After discussion with advisors] I don't think he understood exactly what you said. Can I explain to him again?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Yes of course you can.
MR KAZAMIAS: [Further discussion with advisors] Would it be possible to stay this order so that we can –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Mrs Theodorou has had all the orders.
MR KAZAMIAS: I think you misunderstood.
MR HAMILTON: [After a pause] To simplify matters could I speak?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: If you would prefer Mr Hamilton to deal with matters I'd be happy for that.
MR HAMILTON: [Further discussion with advisors] Excuse me. What we are asking is: are you now granting permission?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: No I'm not. I am waiting to hear the application for permission. I can't, I am not granting permission until I have heard –
MR KAZAMIAS: But one cannot do that because there has not been due process in this whole case. We have brought to your attention a number of letters, On 24/6, the last one and the letter we have not received this morning, which appears to be looked at - not to –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Yes, I have read the letter from you Mr Kazamias dated 29 June 2005. 1 have been through it carefully. Unfortunately it does not deal with the procedural restrictions that I have in dealing with this case.
MR HAMILTON: This case is just-
MR KAZAMIAS: How about the last paragraph?
MR YIANNIDES: Read the last paragraph. Read the last paragraph.

Page8
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: I have read the last paragraph and it doesn't deal with anything to do with what I am allowed to do and what I'm not allowed to do.
MR HAMILTON: Could you clarify what you are'.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Yes, Let me explain the whole –
MR HAMILTON: - About what you are here to do in this particular case?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Yes. Let me explain exactly my difficulty in doing anything with regard to this case. The Civil Procedure Rules are the rules which set out what occurs with regard to civil work in the County Court. Civil Procedure Rules 1998-
MR HAMILTON: - Yes?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: They set out all the rules relating to civil procedure in the County Court. Now under Civil Procedure Rule 70.5-
MR HAMILTON: Thank you very much.
MR KAZAMIAS: Yes?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: 70.5:
      "Enforcement of awards of bodies other than the High Court and County Courts: can be registered in a County Court".

In other words, awards of other people. Awards of tribunals and other people can be simply registered in the County Court without the County Court being involved in the final process at all because that is something that doesn't apply here. There's specific rules relating to just registration.

Now in this particular case, an award was registered by the Claimants, Gemstar Development Limited under Civil Procedure Rule 70.5. The enforcement of awards of bodies other than the High Court and County Court, what happens is set out under that rule. Essentially what happens is; there is a list of things that can be enforced, which includes employment tribunal decisions. But there are all sorts of other decisions including very unusual things like decisions under the Allotments Act 1922, the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986. All sorts of things that are awards by other tribunals and Courts –
MR HAMILTON: You said awards by other tribunals –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Yes,
MR HAMILTON: In this case it specifically referred to ET. However, Gemstar registered this claim months before those Court proceedings have come to any form of an end. In other words, they have registered it prior to an appeal process which is in itself-

Page9
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Well, let –
MR HAMILTON: - not quite correct in the rules for procedures.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Well the procedure is very simple and doesn't require an appeal process to come to an end. The procedure is very simple and all that a Claimant has to do to enforce an award is fill up Form N322A and send it in correctly completed within a copy of the award.
MR HAMILTON: They have assumed that an appeal would not have been won in that sense?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: [Background discussion] Well, it doesn't make any difference if there's an appeal or not.
MR HAMILTON: It seems very strange that latterly a Court order has been put out to stop an appeal of-
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Can 1 continue please?
MR YIANNIDES: May I address the Court your Honour?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Could I just continue for one –
MR YIANNIDES: No.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Well, I'm the Judge so –
MR YIANNIDES: I will ask you to stand down. You are misconducting this business.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Mr –
MR YIANNIDES: You are misconducting this business.
DISTRICT RIDGE STEPHENSON: Please will you stop interrupting the proceedings?
MR YIANNIDES: You are misconducting this business, my dear.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: It is contempt of Court to interrupt.
MR YIANN1DES: Well, you are in contempt of the law, my dear.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: No. I am –
MR YIANNIDES: You are in contempt of the law.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: No. I an the Judge, Right. [Background discussion] If you are not going to behave, you will be excluded.

Page10
MR YIANNIDES: You are in contempt of the law. I am not excluded.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Would you please leave?
MR YIANNIDES: You are in contempt. Did she sign this, did she sign this?
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Would you please go outside?
MR YIANNIDES: I am not going out. What are you going to do about it? You are in contempt of the law Mrs Stephenson.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Well if you are not going to go out –
MR YIANNIDES: You are in contempt of the law.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: I cannot continue with this hearing –
MR YIANNIDES: What you say? Excuse me, lam going to point you right my dear –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: I cannot –
MR YIANNIDES: There are two cases undetermined –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: I –
MR YIANNIDES: - when you did not - because it's like you say they sat down and they did nothing.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Right. I –
MR YIANNIDES: You are going to do the same.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Right. I cannot continue with this hearing –
MR YIANNIDES: No I am Sony.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: - if it's going to –
MR KAZAMIAS: Intimidation and harassment –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: - be interrupted.
MR YIANNIDES: - you are abusing your office.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Right. If you're not going to leave –
MR YIANNIDES: No I'm not leaving.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: - then I'm going to bring these proceedings to a close.

Page11
MR YIANNIDES: You had better do so because you don't have the jurisdiction in the ease.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: I do have jurisdiction in the case –
MR YIANNIDES: You don't have jurisdiction in the case.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Right. I-
MR YIANNIDES: I will point you to the cases you are ignoring –
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: Right. I am withdrawing –
MR YIANNIDES: - The presentation you have in this country.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: - and if you do not leave by the time I get back there will be no further hearing. I am withdrawing. if these gentlemen do not –
MR YIANNIDES: You had better stand down.
DISTRICT JUDGE STEPHENSON: - not. If this gentleman in the green suit does not leave then there will be no further hearing,
MR YIANNIDES: You are colour blind too. It is not a green suit. What do you want to do?

[Judge Stephenson. leaves the Courtroom]
COURT USHER: Can you leave please?
MR YIANNIDES: I am not leaving.
COURT USHER: Why not?
MR YIANNIDES: I asked her to stand down. She misconducted the business.
COURT USHER: Sir, she has asked you to leave.
MR YIANNIDES: lam not leaving, She misconducted the business of the Court,

[Background discussion]
MR YIANNIDES: No, she said continuation upon time- unless –
COURT USHER: Nothing is going to happen so you may as well leave.
MR YIANNIDES: Yes, we are going to leave,
COURT USHER: Well could you leave now please?

Page12
MR YIANNIDES: I am not saying here so she can harass us ….. in Court proceedings –
MR HAMILTON: I can’t see that she is going to be –
MR YIANNIDES: -there are two cases…
MR HAMILTON: - before them …, she’s admitted to that then.
MR KAZAMIAS: Yes.
COURT USHER: I am sorry but I am going to have to ask you to leave.
MR YIANNIDES: She cannot carry on the way she started.
COURT USHER: You are going to have to ask this gentleman to leave.
MR YIANNIDES: We are already leaving my friend. We are all leaving.