Robin, Its ALL in commerce and what they did not and do not teach even the Legal profession is that Common Law including Law Merchant is in a Jurisdiction ABOVE statute/legislative and national law jurisdiction. We are ALL classified as Merchants and have the ability to make contract one to one, man to man, woman to woman, and woman to man, and NO national legal action can interfere with such agreements. Law Merchant is not law the Law professors will declare - Wrong!! Check www.gov.au 'Bills of Exchange Act 1909 as current and amended. Look in Part One section 5 sub-para 2 and see what you find. Its there in clear text, ....Common Law including Law Merchant applies... Then consider that Lord Mansfield in about 1760 or so had the 1611 King James Version of the Christian Bible (in Latin script) incorporated into English Law, and that it is still in there, and apparently Law sufficient that a true commercial contract can be written with it. Charlie swore his oaths on this book (and is in contract for breaking them).
Now make a Counter Offer to anyone suitable and if they do not respond and rebut your claims, point by point, Tacit agreement applies and the contract agreement is binding because that is what is done constantly with everyone in this commerce based system we have.
How many see the offer to Contract in this scenario? Doctor, "Its cancer! (the threat) though we may have caught it in time (the hope)". Doctor, "the treatment we recommend will be.... (the deal or contract condition)". The supposed diagnosis and possible solution are the 'offer' and the treatment planned is the condition of a 'conditional offer to contract'. How many patients would see this and how many of those would think to 'Counter Offer' with their own conditions binding the 'doctor and agents' to the patient's conditions in the 'deal' to be agreed. How many doctor's would agree?
We can do the same thing in regard to what people did or are doing throughout this scamdemic. We can make people accountable for what they did or are doing by establishing a commercial contract, a private one on one contract, though we had better do so in honour, with full disclosure and know what we are doing and how it all functions. We are in a commercial community system only 'they' forgot to ell us what and how.
Are you arguing that legislation that relates solely to promissory notes e.g. cheques, governs all mercantile relationships, ignoring all other common law (i.e. case law) and other statutes?
Robin, Its ALL in commerce and what they did not and do not teach even the Legal profession is that Common Law including Law Merchant is in a Jurisdiction ABOVE statute/legislative and national law jurisdiction. We are ALL classified as Merchants and have the ability to make contract one to one, man to man, woman to woman, and woman to man, and NO national legal action can interfere with such agreements. Law Merchant is not law the Law professors will declare - Wrong!! Check www.gov.au 'Bills of Exchange Act 1909 as current and amended. Look in Part One section 5 sub-para 2 and see what you find. Its there in clear text, ....Common Law including Law Merchant applies... Then consider that Lord Mansfield in about 1760 or so had the 1611 King James Version of the Christian Bible (in Latin script) incorporated into English Law, and that it is still in there, and apparently Law sufficient that a true commercial contract can be written with it. Charlie swore his oaths on this book (and is in contract for breaking them).
Now make a Counter Offer to anyone suitable and if they do not respond and rebut your claims, point by point, Tacit agreement applies and the contract agreement is binding because that is what is done constantly with everyone in this commerce based system we have.
How many see the offer to Contract in this scenario? Doctor, "Its cancer! (the threat) though we may have caught it in time (the hope)". Doctor, "the treatment we recommend will be.... (the deal or contract condition)". The supposed diagnosis and possible solution are the 'offer' and the treatment planned is the condition of a 'conditional offer to contract'. How many patients would see this and how many of those would think to 'Counter Offer' with their own conditions binding the 'doctor and agents' to the patient's conditions in the 'deal' to be agreed. How many doctor's would agree?
We can do the same thing in regard to what people did or are doing throughout this scamdemic. We can make people accountable for what they did or are doing by establishing a commercial contract, a private one on one contract, though we had better do so in honour, with full disclosure and know what we are doing and how it all functions. We are in a commercial community system only 'they' forgot to ell us what and how.
Are you arguing that legislation that relates solely to promissory notes e.g. cheques, governs all mercantile relationships, ignoring all other common law (i.e. case law) and other statutes?