Most will know the story of Rodney Culleton being ousted from the Senate in early 2017 after a losing battle for his Senate seat in the High Court of Australia sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns.
During this time, Senator in exile Rod Culleton has maintained he continues to be a constitutionally elected Senator due to the procedural requirements set out in our Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) which he believed had not been followed.
Section 22 Commonwealth Constitution sets out that a third of the Senate must be seated to to form a quorum to hold any validity. With the passage of the Senate (Quorum) Act 1991, the Parliament has changed the quorum to one quarter of the total number of Senators, which with the current Senate size of 76 means that at least 19 Senators are required for a quorum. The Senate was not quorate the day the referral was made in the Senate. Parry ignored this even after Sam Dastyari made reference to the state of the chamber.
In August 2018 Culleton faced Chief Justice Susan Kiefel in the High Court of Australia which after hearing his argument reserved her decision for later. He was denied justice on the grounds he did not bring up s22 quorum from the beginning. In doing so Kiefel basically denounced our constitution having any validity even after former Solicitor General David Bennett stated to Kiefel that a stream cannot rise above its source.
Culleton knowing too well that justice was never going to be served in Australia, and the jurisdiction was of the incorrect Crown, that being the Queen of Australia vs the Queen of the United Kingdom which is considered a legal nonsense, so Culleton set out to file in the UK where he had the jurisdiction of the Queen of the UK.
Yesterday 16 January 2019 the High Court of Justice in London UK, accepted a filling on behalf of Senator Culleton and his team to commence proceedings to call Senator Culleton in the Queen’s jurisdiction of the UK to deal with the unconstitutional removal of a federally elected Senator of the 45th Parliament in order to address the constitutional instrument (motion 163) invoked on 1st December 2016 which remains part heard in the senate.Interim submissions were submitted to the registrar proving the UK had the jurisdiction to hear the application.
This is a historical step in the nations history for the restoration of the commonwealth of Australia, which is clearly outlined in Senator Culleton’s Prayer to the House of Lords, to which Senator Culleton is very proud to call on the UK to uphold its binding commitments, and to come in and constitutionally address the legislative power and judicature in the Commonwealth of Australia.
The question would arise, what now with the Australia Act 1986 which removed our constitutional right to seek remedy in the UK leaving us with the High Court of Australia as our final means of justice? Does this new precedence prove the Australia Act as an invalid Act of the Australian Parliament?