Pepper Finance Corporation v Williams [2008] NSWSC 4

The borrower Mrs Williams sought a stay of eviction by on the grounds that she wished to appeal the judgment for possession on the following grounds:

  1. She did not consent to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court,
  2. Pepper Finance failed to to follow the procedure for dispute resolution laid down in chapter 18 of St Matthew’s Gospel,
  3. Section 80 of the Australian Constitution entitled her to a trial by jury,
  4. Clause 29 of Magna Carta which, reads  “No free man shall be…disseised of his freehold…except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land.”          
  5. Judgement for possession was in breach of Bill of Rights 1689, Petition of Right 1628 and the Habeas Corpus Act 1640,
  6. The absence of a trial by jury would be contrary to democracy,
  7. The court attendance notice referred to her as a “person” She submits that, rather than being a “person” (which she traces back to its etymological origin as being a mask used to hide the truth of a matter) she is a free human being, and answerable to God.
  8. Section 116 of the Australian Constitution entitles her to freedom of religion.

After carefully reviewing these arguments Campbell JA found against the borrower and rejected the stay application.

Click here to read the full judgment

Scroll to Top