Judicial Review by way of Constitutional Judicial Review – Writ of prohibition

Prohibition, Writ of

An order from a superior court to a lower court or tribunal directing the judge and the parties to cease the litigation because the lower court does not have proper jurisdiction to hear or determine the matters before it.

A writ of prohibition is an extraordinary remedy that is rarely used.


To tackle the lacks of jurisdiction in the circuit court possession actions up to 11/01/2017 (when courts act 2016 was commenced) – maybe someone should lodge a writ of prohibition as one of the citizenry in the constitutional supreme court… extra-ordinary times call for extra-ordinary measures!!


Two type of courts in plain sight:

  1. the (superior) constitutional courts as framed in the 1937 constitution (SC, COA, and HC), which anyone of the 1937 constitutional citizenry can use;
  2. and the (inferior) state courts as framed in statute in the 1961 acts as amended (SC, COA, HC, CC, DC), which a state public or civil servant or state licensee can use, only if they can show cause;


The inferior state courts ordering the banks to take possession of alleged security freehold title, is not a constitutional requirement to an all nation (32 county) island, pursuant to the intent and the objective of the 1937 constitution – 100,000 cases are f**ked..


Possession in ireland is commonly measured as 9/10 ths of the law and legal title is measured as 1/10 th of the law …. A possession order in a state court of law, only delivers rulings on legal title, and can never by law, order the delivery of possession of immovable property against the possessor – the court can only order that the bank plaintiff “appears” to have the right to possess the property on foot of the documentation before the court… There is subtle but huge gaping difference; The state court can only coerce, induce, threaten under the colour of legal compulsion, in gaining the consent of property , to give up his holding and rights to possession; Inducement, coercion, threatening and alluding to legal compulsion, are repugnant to the states non fatal offences against the persons act, and are crimes, and these state court judicial actions and banking actions, performed without jurisdiction, void all commercial contracts abinito;


Add to that, that generally the possessor of immovable property is not only a state licensee by virtue of the folio license number, but is also one of the citizenry of the 1937 constitution, and the state court has no superior rights over the constitutional citizenry, as the citizenry are external and foreign to the state, and the state acts as the servant trustee, for the benefit of the of the constitutional citizenry – therefore the constitutional afforded rights of man and the citizen, guarantee rights to private property, guarantee rights to ones dwelling, and guarantee rights to the family, always trump the states rights, and the rights of any state licensee (such as a bank), when one claims “man status” and “constitutional citizenry status”, to any state court in a special manner;


In fact, the state courts by issuing of possession orders for the bank licensees (registered security party on the freeholding and lease holding folio licensee) allegedly and appearing to be against the registered folio licensees (freeholder and leaseholder title), is repugnant to the nations citizenry rights afforded and guaranteed in the constitution – as the state is ignoring the fact that the folio licensee (title owner in possession) is generally one of the citizenry of the constitution of 1937… the citizenry being a superior person, and being superior to all inferior state persons inc the state judges;


The national constitution of 1937 requires that the allodial title to the whole island is held in trust for the nations citizenry, by the state known as eire, acting as the constitutional trustee; The state is the nations servant and trustee… When the trustee (state court) is ordering banks to gain possessory “flawed” title, on foot of fundamentally “flawed” court cases, fundamentally “flawed” court procedure, fundamentally “flawed”  legislation, and fundamentally “flawed”  claims – the state as trustee has gone rogue – and is running the trust for the benefit of their buddies – the financiers;  There is a simple reason for this given later, below;


There is huge difference between a nation (and its citizenry), a state democracy, and a state republic – the only actors that exist in a state are public servants, civil servants and state licensees…. When you & a bank go to a state possession court you are both going as a state licensee (unless you inform the court to the contrary of your superior status);  Both plaintiff and defendant hold a claim to the folio license, known as legal title – you the possessor as conveyance folio licensee as the freeholder, and the bank as a conveyance licensee as the legal charge holder, on the licensees free hold, or lease hold license (your licence);


Jurisdiction issues that stand as barriers that have never been addressed by the state nor the state courts are listed in no particular order below (and exclude the trumping the constitutional citizen has over the state actors issue, for all state courts – even the state supreme court…)


  • Wrong name of circuit court in irish on court filings – despite the 1961 act and despite all circuit court forms showing the correct irish wording, and lawfully requiring same on court papers;
  • Rateable valuation is now claimed to be zero value by supreme court – and a court nor a trust cannot be formed when there is no equity, in law or in fact… i.e. €0 – the rateable valuation issue will never go away …..;
  • Circuit court did not ever enjoy jurisdiction to deal with HC land registry matters – the 1961 act required the consent form 1a to be signed by both parties, and lodged so the circuit courts jurisdiction could be enlarged to that of the high court to hear the land registry matter… This was changed in the courts act 2016;
  • Amendments to old law cannot apply retrospectively! So shove your 2009 L&CLRA,  2013 L&CLRA and your CA 2016 up your state h*le!!
  • The market value of €3m requires that the household tax is registered for the property, if not registered the €3m does not apply;
  • There were no possession proceedings rules in existence until after the 2009 act – state circuit civil bill form 2R only came into existence after that act!!
  • From 2009 to 2013 there was a lacuna in the ROT act 1964 as section 62(7) was repealed – all summary cases taken prior to 2013 are f**ked! And cannot be amended and must discontinued, which results in costs being afforded to the defendant;
  • A special indorsement of claim cannot be amended in a special action or a summary action – this has been so since the jews were in babylonia 3 to 4 millennia ago – and there are 100’s of irish case precedents on not permitting amending a special indorsement of claim – but yet ignorant county registrars allow the SPICs to be amended, despite case precedent …;
  • Pre 2013 special indorsement of claims were all defective – as the plaintiff was not mentioned, never mind described;
  • Pre 2013 special indorsement of claims were all defective – as the defendant was not mentioned, never mind described;
  • Pre 2013 special indorsement of claims were all defective – as there were no causes of action to justify a claim;
  • Pre 2013 special indorsement of claims were all defective – as there were no defaults mentioned;
  • Pre 2013 special indorsement of claims were all defective – as the law relied upon was either a landlord tenancy law or was a law that was repealed;
  • Demand procedures by banks were all incorrect – Correct is: 1 demand for loan, 1 demand for vacant possession and then appoint a solicitor – not a demand for money and then sol and then court;
  • Demands for money were issued outside the 2yrs and 1 day permitted by statute;
  • The plaintiff must claim you have no defence to the alleged claim in the civil bills special indorsement of claim – which none do;
  • The plaintiffs agents are swearing on hearsay in the grounding affidavit that their solicitor/counsel advised them that the defendant has no defence – that’s hearsay – wheres the proof that the affiant got that solicitor advice, and that the advice is correct; It’s a bit like relying on the testimony of a guy who heard a guy telling a story about another fella – the plaintiffs agent admits to not having first-hand knowledge, and this averment does not comply with any rules of evidence;
  • Special – as in Special Indorsement of Claim – means that an element of the jurisdictional norms is missing/absent from the Special Claim – i.e. the defendant has no defence – when can anyone say you have no defence????; Think of special criminal court – no jury; Special Purpose Vehicle – no consent gained; Special Contract = deed or indenture, which means a one sided gift, only one giving party, no contractual consideration from the other side; Special Rights – rights gained without law or without contract, as in the rights afforded under deed; A Special Order or Special Judgement always uses the wording “it appears” or “appearing” – thus not in the affirmative…. = no evidence confirming, however all court orders must be in the affirmative – possession orders are full of the word “appear”
  • The possession order is not a final possession judgement, it is just an interim order, and as with all cases the order MUST be moved to judgement in finality, and this must be entered on the court file – in the same way a summary order MUST be moved finality i.e. liberty to enter final judgement;
  • The defendant MUST be able to ascertain the TOTAL nature of the alleged claim of the plaintiff being laid before the defendant, in its TOTALITY from the special indorsement of claim – thems their state rules!! And case precedent support this; As otherwise all case precedent on special indorsements requires that the matter is struck…
  • In any possession case the plaintiff must state that you the defendant have no defence to the claim!! If this “no defence claim” is NOT in the special indorsement of claim – the special indorsement of claim is actually a general indorsement of claim, and the case/action must go to plenary hearing – simple as that… ;
  • Etc – the list goes on… and this is just the civil bill and SPIC doc!!



  • Now Add in, that for you “joe soap” to be a domestic conveyancing licensee (state actor), you generally also act as one of the nations 1937 citizenry (superior person above state actors – as the state is the servant trustee for the constitution)
  • The constitutional citizenry family is afforded superior rights above the state
  • The constitutional judicial declaration given and accepted, states that ze judge will uphold the constitution and will uphold all laws of the state;
  • The constitutional judicial declaration given and accepted, does not appear publicly as a written (subscribed) declaration on any register;
  • The constitutional judicial declaration given and accepted, states that ze judge will lay no harm on man (nor citizen in the direct translation)
  • The constitutional citizenry woman is afforded superior rights above the state
  • The constitutional citizenry dwelling is inviolable – Inviolable means “never to be broken, infringed or dishonoured”;
  • Acting as a state licensee, does not diminish your afforded and guaranteed constitutional citizenry rights;
  • The state cannot jail or detain one of the constitutional citizenry – unless a crime has been committed by him;
  • The constitutional order of priority for STATUS is: creator – man – citizenry – state actor…. All state actors inc judges are inferior to the constitutional citizenry …End of story
  • The constitutional citizenry even have a state port pass – issued by the minister of external/foreign affairs – it called a passport, or in irish “an port pass”  – the citizenry is external to the state – always was and always will be;
  • You need to know and utilise your own STATUS and use this status for yourself, knowing full well that is above the STATE status of an official in a state acting capacity…
  • Wakey wakey – the whole state game is a con, con, con, con…..
  • Know who you are, and know who you are not;


  • Conflicts of interest: State as  trustee holds the allodial title of the island in trust for the constitutional citizenry – this allodial title is subdivided and then managed by way of freehold and lease hold by the high court land registry pursuant to the 1926 High Court Land Registry Rules as amended; How can any state judge adjudicating state land title NOT have a conflict of interest??
  • Why is land title held in the dept of justice?? Surely it should be in the dept of land ?? Conflict..
  • The route they rely upon to hold ALL state land title in the high court —-IN THE PALEs: Crown Magna Charta Hibernia 1216 (monarchy lost – divine right of kings absolved – barons were bequeathed kings allodial title – barons set up the crown corporation) —— Land Baronies ——– Land Barons (landlords) ——— Barons agents as Judges in Barony Courts = local kings bench for tenants ——- START OF MOVEMENT OUTSIDE THE PALEs : Bar Set Up 1548 Henry 8 (British acCredited Registry/Register) —— Barristers/Barons Judges in Civil Bill Courts = Civil Bill courts for licensed tenants ————- freeholder on the barony = licensed tenant under special baron contract — Barratry alive and well since 1215 = crime
  • Top to bottom con!!


Think about this!!

We now know from the 2014 and 2015 bank of england papers that debt backed money is created in the act of a bank lending, where the borrower is both the depositor and borrower… What value is the borrower depositing in the bank? The Bill of exchange/IOU/offer he issued or accepted!! The globally adopted bills of exchange law applies when the borrower/depositor seeks to inspect the IOU/contract he issued and deposited to the bank; If the bank does not hold the IOU/contract, per the BOEx Act, the bank loses the right to the security (conveyance rights) and the loses the right to lay a lawful claim;


The papers go on to say 1. That savings do not back lending (bang goes fractional reserve lending!!), financing/lending to borrowers backs lending = new debt based money into a state economy ; 2. That that one of the roles of the central bank is to govern/control a state economy – (think accelerator for an engine) – to keep the economy at a constant velocity, namely 2% inflation; This controlling is effected by raising or lowering (accelerating or decelerating) the interest rates on debt;


This means that money creation is NOT centralised – in that it is licensed high street banks and merchant banks in a decentralised way, that create money in an economy; These papers show the BOEngland doing a Pontius Pilate, by washing their hands of debt based money creation; The common belief that somehow a state is responsible for money creation is debunked by these papers;


Now why do you think all banks must be saved and propped up? – if one goes wallop so does the money they created – and the economy tanks; Out of all entities ever created in a state, a debt based economy requires that any failing bank must be saved, liquidated in an orderly manner (Anglo), or reversed into a healthy bank (lehman, bosi etc), as to allow a bank to fail would bring down the economy, solely because they are the money creators;


What happens when a licensed bank goes rogue, is the license ever revoked or pulled?? No way, this can never be done, as to remove the license, partially removes the money creation ability of that economy; And despite there being legislation for the removal of banking licences in every state, for a variety of numerous offences – the state will ONLY ever sanction the bank by way of a fine – think tracker; Removal of any banking license will damage the money creation ability of that state economy, and lay question marks over their past money creations of that bank – and we cant have that; So why have legislation that a state will never use??


The state judiciary are in full knowledge of the, and that is why they can never allow the bank to lose – the court stats prove this fact; As vulture funds DO NOT create debt backed money in a state, and thus they can be sacrificed in a state court in lieu of the licensed banking money creators…the vulture funds oblivion is around the corner… due to 1. they extract “dead value” from an economy, and 2. they do not support an expanding economy… The only service the provide is a “cleaning up” exercise on bad debt based (not 100% debt backed) loans;


Hope this makes sense…


Thus a constitutional challenge by way of a judicial review – straight into the supreme court…grounded on articles X, Y, and Z of the 1937 constitution…. Requiring the constitutional supreme court to shut down the state circuit court??

So again… Prohibition, Writ of

An order from a superior court to a lower court or tribunal directing the judge and the parties to cease the litigation because the lower court does not have proper jurisdiction to hear or determine the matters before it.

A writ of prohibition is an extraordinary remedy that is rarely used.

Time to use a writ of prohibition??

If the constitutional supreme court refuses, of we go to the UN in the hague!!

It is probably the best way to bring all the “ state banking hiddens and state court hiddens” out in the open – for all to see!!

Some links below, for a constitutional challenge by way of a judicial review….


Mandamus (Ireland) Act, 1826




mandamus | Terry Gorry & Co. Solicitors




Judicial Review of Administrative Action. The Problem of Remedies. 2




Judicial review of public decisions

Public decisions may be judicially reviewed by the High Court to determine whether they are illegal. Find out how to initiate judicial review proceedings.




Court Rules: Judicial review and orders affecting personal liberty : Court Rules : Courts Service of Ireland

Rules of Court governing practice and procedure of the courts in Ireland. Includes appendices, amendments, and forms. Information on court fees which are payable on documents filed in court offices in Ireland




The Courts System – Law Library of Ireland – The Bar of Ireland





Barony (Ireland) – Wikipedia




Allodial title – Wikipedia




Allodial Title – a Freedom of Information request to Land Registry

I understand that it is possible to create an Allodial Title in England. Please highlight the process to do this, or can it simply be declared and Registered accordingly. Yours faithfully, Claire Cox




Consultation Paper Modernising Land Law.pdf




Am still only 12 dimensional man – who on occasion, magically demotes to the 2d, in the role of superior constitutional citizenry status!!


And not a state actor of any state, ever, ever, ever….!!


Inferior is below me!!