Supreme Court of Canada case-law on Beneficiaries' independent RIGHT to ENFORCE the TRUST

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Supreme Court of Canada case-law on Beneficiaries' independent RIGHT to ENFORCE the TRUST

derek moran
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Supreme Court of Canada case-law on Beneficiaries' independent RIGHT to ENFORCE the TRUST

iamsomedude
Administrator



all that is left is show HOW one is a beneficiary.

~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Supreme Court of Canada case-law on Beneficiaries' independent RIGHT to ENFORCE the TRUST

derek moran
Are you talking about by putting a LEGAL NOTICE in the classifieds section of the newspaper that the Birth Certificate has been DELIVERED back to the one who SIGNED-and-SEALED it giving time for OBJECTIONS, thereby making it part of the PUBLIC RECORD?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Supreme Court of Canada case-law on Beneficiaries' independent RIGHT to ENFORCE the TRUST

iamsomedude
Administrator
This post was updated on .
 
 
Well, the State of Birth (Province of Birth in Canada, I presume) appears to be the TRUSTEE of the RESULTING TRUST (identified by the BC NAME) but one need to inform PROBATE COURT in the County of Birth (again Providence in Canada, I presume) of the mistake in issuing the letter of administration (BC) thru a claim for the estate (see Minnesota Rule 220) for that is where the TRUST is ADMINISTRATED for PROBATE COURT is an ECCLESIASTICAL COURT and can not be impeached thru mere public notice as all these corporations and courts other than probate are TEMPORAL and operate thru the ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS of the PROBATE COURT ... they can only act upon DECEDENT ESTATES, thus the BC is only a letter of administration (private placement security) based upon a presumption of death/abandonment; a rebuttable presumption.

Supreme Court of the United States has explained this thru Scott v. McNeal, 154 U.S. 34 (1894) ... read it ... re-read it ... then re-re-read it ... and then read it again ... understand it ... comprehend what this case is telling you BEFORE you go out and hurt yourselves or worse yet, others.

Hell, I hesitate giving this case out for I KNOW how retarded people get, especially when everyone seems to be in rush to get things done because they fear losing something here on Earth which means they are not right with God and people need to seek the kingdom of heaven and God's righteousness FIRST and all else will be added unto them. (see Matthew 6:33-34)

But, then I am reminded that everyone must go thru whatever it is they must go thru; not my problem, nor my burden. I can sit here and give you all the paperwork we filed, where we filed and even how we filed, but YOU MUST CLAIM YOUR HEAVENLY ESTATE BEFORE CLAIMING YOUR EARTHLY ESTATE ... the accuser is no longer in heaven; having been tossed out on the 16th of November (confirmation of this has just been received cause he was there laughing at us at first on the 11th, but then was left with teeth gnashed in silence), but the ACCUSATIONS remain, thus one must seek the Court of Heaven and repent of one's sins within the Throne Room: seek audience before the ULTIMATE JUDGE within the ULTIMATE ECCLESIASTICAL COURT.

You all can sit here and argue all you wish about this matter, but who are you trying to convince, me or yourself? And what makes you all think I give two shits about what you do or do not do? It is your problem, your burden, and only you can identify the enemy and until you identify the enemy, there is nothing left to discuss.
 

But this is why nothing seems to work in these courts: as long as the BC exists, there exists a presumption of death (abandonment) with respect to the Estate held in the Grave: BC is a GRAVEN IMAGE; Sheol or Hades: land of the dead = purgatory, and the lower courts/corporation can not impeach the probate court ... would be like some 5 year old child trying to tell the parent how to be a parent (kinda like what I hear when I listen to people talk on these talkshoes and such): temporal can not impeach the ecclesiastical.

And it appears the name change crowd is going to be really pissed off when they find out they only claimed a bowl of porridge because once the name change occurs, the BC record is sealed, but the estate does not transfer to the Storehouse, thus these folks are akin to the 5 foolish virgins (see Matthew 25) ... they sought NOT the kingdom of heaven FIRST, they sought only to do what THEY wanted, their kingdom, not act as God instructed. But again, not my problem.


Have the eyes to hear, the ears to see and the knowledge to act with the patience and humility of wisdom.

~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.