My Submissions for Feb 2023 Hearing in Crypto Class Action - Part 3 / 3

image.png

Conclusion

  1. The Respondents have utterly failed to provide any factual or legal
    basis for their interlocutory applications to stay or declass an
    important public interest class action affecting the welfare of
    millions of Australians, purportedly "in the interests
    of justice" on the basis of alleged conflicts of interest and/or
    alleged prohibited contingency fees arising from the litigation
    funding arrangements.

  2. They have ignored extensive controlling High Court and Full Federal
    Court authority which creates insurmountable obstacles to their
    applications and instead cited a dubious selection of superseded,
    clearly inapplicable and plainly wrong cases, mostly first
    instance, two without a contradictor and where binding authority
    was not brought to the attention of the Court and in State rather
    than Federal Courts.

  3. They have completely failed to make out any real conflict of
    interest between the Applicant and group members (or any other
    conflict of interest).

  4. They have wrongly impugned the Applicant's professional experience
    and conduct.

  5. They have consistently cited cases which rely on the ancient
    concepts of maintenance and champerty (especially in relation to
    alleged contingency fees) without understanding these concepts,
    their legal history and why they can never have any application to
    these proceedings.

  6. They have failed to cite any authority that conflict of interest or
    contingency fees are a basis for staying or declassing proceedings
    regularly brought, let alone proceedings where the Court has
    already taken active steps to assert jurisdiction on the basis of a
    prima facie case and public interest.

  7. They have ignored the very substantial public interest in these
    proceedings and the highly relevant binding authority of Epic,
    which demonstrates that such public interest provides very strong
    reasons for not staying proceedings, even when a strong basis for
    staying does actually exist.

  8. They have failed to examine, as required by binding authority,
    whether their concerns (if they had any validity at all) could be
    addressed by other tools available to the Court.

  9. They have engaged in less than ideal professional conduct in an
    attempt to advance entirely unmeritorious interlocutory
    applications for the improper purposes of preventing a substantive
    hearing of the Applicant's claims enforcing Part IV of the CCA and
    putting costs pressure on a self-represented applicant by inserting
    this interlocutory application prior to the hearing of the
    Applicant's interlocutory application for a No Adverse Costs Order,
    made at the earliest stage of proceedings (almost 2.5 years ago)
    and part heard.

  10. The Respondents' interlocutory applications must be dismissed.

  11. The Applicant requests the Court to consider appropriate measures
    to discourage the Respondents from making further unmeritorious
    interlocutory applications for improper purposes, given that the
    usual threat of adverse costs is not applicable to the Respondents
    both because the Applicant is self represented and because of the
    immense wealth of the Respondents.

__________________________________

Signed by the Applicant, Andrew Hamilton on 12 December 2022


Please vote for my Hive witness. (KeyChain or HiveSigner)

Witness Vote using direct Hivesigner

Sort:  

Voted as witness. You might want to update your HIVE price feed.

Thanks. This is being fixed.

What a load of information! And what a long process.
In addition, I struggle with that language, the terminology. Even after the second time reading through it to find something which brings me a better understanding and tells me that you got closer to your requests, or you have to stand back from this case, or you simply have to wait until February 🧐

Good work. Voted for your Witness. ❤️ 🇮🇱

96A8CB67-2BC5-40CD-9E89-D1C973F567DB.jpeg

Dear @apshamilton,
Your support for the current HiveBuzz proposal (#199) is much appreciated but the proposal will expire soon!
May we ask you to review and renew your support for the new proposal so our team can continue its work?
You can support the new proposal (#248) on Peakd, Ecency,

Hive.blog / https://wallet.hive.blog/proposals
or using HiveSigner.

Thank you!

Ho Ho Ho! @apshamilton, one of your Hive friends wishes you a Merry Christmas and asked us to give you a new badge!

The HiveBuzz team wish you a Merry Christmas!
May you have good health, abundance and everlasting joy in your life.

To find out who wanted you to receive this special gift, click here!

You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking

Check out our last posts:

Christmas Challenge - Offer a gift to your friends
HiveBuzz World Cup Contest - Sponsor Feedback and Feedback Request
HiveBuzz World Cup Contest - Prizes from our sponsors
The Hive Gamification Proposal Renewal

Dear @apshamilton

I am hoping you can consider voting on this proposal if you think it could be helpful for communities and hivers in general. Any help, collaboration, or constructive criticism will be welcome.

You can vote here:

Hi Andrew although your new year celebration is in September I came by to say happy hivey new year and it was a plaesure meeting you in 2022. Wishing you all the luck and happiness for this year

Thanks so much. I hope you had a great Christmas and New Year. I saw your travel post to Dutch Antilles. Its very useful to have sunny islands that are part of your own country!

All holidays spend with my family and the in laws and now with my own produce hahahah on holiday , man I could not be happier.
On to a big new year