CPPA Legal Team predict - Property Rights case to go to highest courts.

G'day Agmates,

Opposite is Peter Spencer and Distinguished Professor of Law Errol Higgins. Professor Higgins has been in a week long conference with Peter and senior members of the Commonwealth Property Protection Association at Peters property high in the Snowy mountain Alps.

Knowing that there are 1,000's of Australian Farmers across Australia now following these developments with great interest, after extensive reviews of the case Professor Higgins has released this important statement for your information.


Press Release
26th June 2007
Errol Higgins Professor of Law


I have been asked to comment on a matter involving Peter J Spencer v The Attorney Generals of the ACT, NSW and the Commonwealth of Australia. This matter was brought by Mr Spencer because of the very substantial reduction in the value of his large rural property near Cooma, on the hearing date 19th March 2007. Unfortunately before Mr Spencer could present his case, the Lawyers for the defendants sought to have proceedings stuck out.

The presiding Judge decided to listen without giving the plaintiff an opportunity to present his case. As a result none of the substance of Mr Spencer’s case was heard.

The Judge reserved his decision and gave a judgement on the 4th April 2007. This decision did not deal with any matter except whether or not Mr Spencer had the right to proceed.

The court held that the cases against the Commonwealth and New South Wales could not possible succeed and the case against the ACT could in the future proceed, but subject to considerable amendment by the plaintiff.

This was adjourned until late August. The very unfortunate aspect of this matter is that Mr Spencer was given no opportunity to present any aspect of his various claims against the defendant authorities.

He has recently been receiving a great deal of encouragement and support from the Commonwealth Property Protection Association as well as other associations and Landowners. I was recently approached by Mr Spencer, his supporters, and other rural dwellers.

In considering the judgement I have reached the clear conclusion that it was misconceived as to the facts and the law. Indeed there was no real consideration of the facts and the law concerned in the judgement it was minimal and did not deal with any of the fundamental legal matters. Consequently I have advised Mr Spencer he has reasonable grounds for an appeal.

As to the appeal there will obviously be arguments over the facts but there will certainly be detailed legal argument. I am at the moment preparing detailed preliminary submissions in relation to the case. The matter is of such fundamental importance, particularly for rural dwellers and others that it is likely to go to the very highest courts.

In addition this kind of matter would be immensely suitable to a full hearing with a civil trial by jury. For hundreds of years common law (judges decisions) have been a major part of our law. Statute law provided by Parliament, like common law is applied and interpreted by judges. This provides safe guards when there may be unscrupulous politicians.

It is quiet clear that taking into account the whole of the pleadings both in fact and in law, provides ample and sufficient cause of action. Because of the inroads by current administrations there are many people who feel both marginalized and have lost all faith in their political representatives. This is all to do with the fundamental rights provided by fee simple.

Finally, the Commonwealth Parliament is the ultimate voice of the Australian People. State legislature must respect that.

Signed



Errol Higgins
Professor of Law.

_________________________________________________
Cheers,
Your Agmate - Steve
Agmates - 100% Pro Australian Farmers