In commerce truth is sovereign and therefore the sovereign always deals in the truth in commerce. In commerce, a debtor cannot win. A creditor cannot loose. We find that there is a common thread woven throughout our entire history. That thread is commerce, the merchant, the money-changer (banks), the law merchant (i.e., the law of commerce), civil law and maritime law. This is not to say that commerce is bad. It does, however, say that commerce brings with it the laws of commerce. Wherever commerce goes, it brings laws that can bind people into slavery. This can happen only if the people agree with it, depending upon their condition of mind, either willingly, through misrepresentations or by mistake.
Download annexure: ON CONTRACTS
NO CONTRACT NO CASE
LAW OF CONTRACTS
BASIC PRINCIPLES OF ENGLISH CONTRACT LAW
Extract from legal resources at the URL link: http://www.hg.org/commerc.html
The following are extracts from:
SOUTH AFRICAN LAW COMMISSION REPORT – PROJECT 47, April 1998
UNREASONABLE STIPULATIONS IN CONTRACTS
AND THE RECTIFICATION OF CONTRACTS
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1.1 The Commission notes the concerns raised by a substantial number of respondents, particularly in respect of the possibility that foreign investors and contracting parties might be discouraged from concluding contracts in South Africa should the law enable courts to review contracts in order to determine whether they comply with principles of contractual fairness... It seems to the Commission that South Africa would rather become the exception and its law of contract would be deficient in comparison with those countries which recognise and require compliance with the principle of good faith in contracts. Furthermore, the Commission accepts on the question whether the proposed legislation will create unwarranted legal uncertainty, that any change effected by the proposed legislation, will produce a measure of legal uncertainty and consequent litigation, at least in the short term when many contracts are challenged. The Commission is, however, of the view that this is a price that must be paid if greater contractual justice is to be achieved, that certainty is not the only goal of contract law, or of any other law, and lastly in any event, that the fears provoked by the proposed Bill are exaggerated, in the light of the experience of countries that have already introduced such legislation. The Commission furthermore considers that the issue of unfair contracts or terms has to be addressed in a more fundamental and less fragmentary way than ad hoc reform to specific Acts, as some respondents proposed, would mean. The Commission is finally of the view that reform is called for and that legislation is the most viable and expedient method to effect legal reform. The Commission is of the view that there is a need to legislate against contractual unfairness, unreasonableness, unconscionability or oppressiveness in all contractual phases, namely at the stages when a contract comes into being, when it is executed and when its terms are enforced. The Commission consequently recommends the enactment of legislation addressing this issue. (See par 18.104.22.168 to 22.214.171.124.)
Artificial v. Living Divide: The real Truth about commerce today
This system for inducing people to commerce has been so carefully designed, that without specialized knowledge their chances of prevailing in an encounter with it are almost non-existent. It owes its success to the interlocking connection of three fundamental ploys.
- Build a system based on appearances (fiction).
- Create subtle ways of getting people to contract with the fiction in order to make them accommodation parties.
- Induce people to give this fiction substance by arguing and testifying in statutory courts.
Download annexure: THE TRUTH ABOUT CONTRACTS
Most of what is being done is without “Delegated Authority” and again is “Null and Void” from the time it was done. Please read – http://www.naturalgod.com/U1FruitsFromaPoisonousTree.pdf
PDF page 108 or Document page 92 states the following:
No one in government is allowed to do anything unless they have been given specific written authority by law, or unless someone who has been given authority in the law gives that person a delegation of authority order spelling out exactly what they can and cannot do under that specific order.
What we are learning is that those that are doing things unconstitutional are operating under the government de facto. Read our research here – http://web.archive.org/web/20120413210819/http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/Which_Dictionary_should_we_use.html