Form 3B (version 5) UCPR 6.2 STATEMENT OF CLAIM

COURT DETAILS Court LOCAL #Division GENERAL #List Registry BURWOOD Case number TITLE OF PROCEEDINGS Plaintiff DAVID GREGORY MURPHY First Defendant HELLENIC CLUB

Second defendant MR ARTHUR BALAYANNIS FILING DETAILS Filed for DAVID GREGORY MURPHY Contact name and telephone 8214 8397 0419 605 365 Contact email [email protected] TYPE OF CLAIM

Mercantile Law - Other [on separate page] [Note: If the completed RELIEF CLAIMED will fit in the available space appearing after TYPE OF CLAIM on the first page of this form, you may delete the page break, include the RELIEF CLAIMED on the first page and start this page with PLEADINGS AND PARTI CULARS.] RELIEF CLAIMED

1 Monies due and owing arising from civil fraud. 2 Fees arising for legal work obliged to be performed by plaintiff to defend prank criminal charge. 3 Court interest. [If you are making a liquidated claim (ie claiming a specific amount of money), include the following information:] Amount of claim $ 93,211 (90,000 + 3,500 - 289) Interest $ 4,411 Filing fees $ Service fees $ Solicitors fees $ TOTAL $

PLEADINGS AND PARTICULARS

1 1) The Plaintiff sues firstly in the amount of $3,500 (as at 16th November 1999) together with court interest less recent reactivation contribution of 16th March 2012 of $289 being for monies denied him in the Burwood Local Court in 2000 due to an application whereby it was alleged that the Self Litigants Association was either a business or experiment or whim of the litigant in person Plaintiff and he should be suing in his own right and not as the Association of which he was President, treasurer and public officer. The Plaintiff sued in Burwood local court, Self Litigants’ Association v various members, for monies due and owing to the association and thence to the Plaintiff as creditor of the said association being for moneys provided as credit to the said association for advertising, insurance, literature and incorporation fees and returnable from the association to be recoverable from members who had completed application forms to become members so as to gain assistance by way of meeting and comparing notes with other litigants in person and gaining access to panel to take the rough edges of their cases prior to presentation in Court and to thus enhance their chances of winning (or decide not to proceed) their cases paying $295 one time dues which dues were to be claimed as legal costs in the cause returning the outlaid fee back into their pocket thus making it the only association of its type in the world where one could enjoy all the benefits and get one’s membership fee back and not ultimately be out of pocket and suffer no loss. Failure to pay dues by 21 delinquent members led to an inability of the Association to meet its obligations to the creditor President leading to the recovery action which was summarily cut short by the unapproved application by a barrister who assisted on panel, and the plaintiff defrauded of his monies in court by the entity who had inserted quisling members having no hope of winning their seemingly fanciful cases so as to hobble the SLA by making it financially unviable and thus result in the fraud of the founding President due to the threat it posed at that time to the legal establishment as a service to the Court to weed out vexatious cases and save the Court’s time and serve the purposes of what later came to be enshrined as the overriding purpose and the precedent of Aon v Anu. 2) During the course of the incomplete proceedings the newly elected public officer withdrew the case so the creditor Plaintiff would not be paid and hence the Plaintiff Creditor was defrauded out of his moneys before the Burwood local court which drew a notable response. The current defendant on 23rd January 2013 made comprehensive part 17.3 admissions in relation to this fraud by some now caught out defendant entity clearing up much confusion as the plaintiff is not sure who is instructing the defendant nor much cares, the matter being essentially civil and remedied by the application of part 17.3. The admitting defendant is at liberty to add a cross defendant.

3) Selecting a figure suggested from 2380/99, the pivotal court filing number, and lest there be any doubt entering on the receipt the last four digits of the prior to 2003 phone number of the said association, 6476 of 9746 6476, as evidences to the Court, the defendant on 16th March 2012 made $289 cash contribution towards the repayment of this debt to reactivate the case with a request that I please call again which I did in person, by phone and by emails.

4) The Plaintiff sues the defendant who has resurrected the outstanding moneys issue by way of fresh evidence and a prank involving the police, recalling the matter 2380/99. On 23rd January and on 30th July 2013 the defendant made comprehensive part 17.3 admissions of the linkage back to the said civil fraud due to the intervention of a party who retained the defendant to perform the said prank to impact the plaintiff’s credibility and standing due to a defendant in another matter having no defence of merit, all admitted per part 17.3, submitted to be the appropriate method provided by the rules to gain admissions of unresponsive parties.

5) The plaintiff seeks a part 17.7 judgment upon admissions as the defendant and its restaurant employee manager Demitris and his promoter Terese Alm have admitted all per part 17.3 in four Notices to Admit Facts personally served by way to direct email addresses upon each of them, with proof of service in evidence, such that their endeavours came to nothing in the criminal jurisdiction where they sought to have me, a creditor, charged with a criminal offence so as to diminish liability on behalf of the defendant or its principal client exposed in my other matter as having no defence of merit.

6) The Plaintiff being Messiah sues for forced labour legal work forced to be done at KC, King’s Council, rates of $1,000 per hour to defend a criminal charge charged upon Him as a creditor to avoid liability as admitted and in evidence (in my 50 year accession legal matter) Messiah (not in dispute by any party, documented at messiahdavid.org), legal advocate, John 14:16, pursuant to a prank involving the police reinvigorating the earlier civil debt which forced labour legal work fees are in the order of $85,000, 85 hours of $1,000, not counting the settling of these pleadings which the plaintiff adds another 5 hours adding another $5,000 thus totaling $90,000.

7) In the alternative since the indemnified defendant has gambled with the costs believing all will be in the bag due to the operation of a compromise slush fund the Plaintiff is now after the requisite lapsed time due for the return of $84,800 of the $85,000 as he gave the defendant a generous opportunity to reduce its costs exposure to $200 and the indemnified defendant rejected the most generous offer and preferred to gamble with the costs and willingly allowed the costs to revert to the full $85,000, now $90,000, so as to create a precedent for the KC costs regime and to create a precedent for this manner of seeking the settlement of legal to costs forced upon people or for use by lawyers. Hence the plaintiff has a win in relation to KC costs in relation to the defendant’s gambling loss which win of $84,800 as the plaintiff was most generous to the defendant and risked almost all gambling that he was dealing with supremely confident gamblers who due to their involvement with the police and reliance upon the compromise slush fund set up to influence court officials would not have to pay even the $200.

8) Hence all being admitted and the defendant given ample opportunity for mitigation of legal costs but taking rather a gamble that the compromise account would do its work the plaintiff requests that judgment as to quantum in the full amount be awarded.

9) I attach and again serve my disclosive Notices to Admit Facts pleadings disclose all salient facts to the court for my part 17.7 application.

10) By way of the Notice to Admit Facts the defendant has admitted all on 23rd January and 30th July 2013 and admitted to the admissions on 8th February 2013.

11) The plaintiff claims Court interest on the $3,500 and on the obligatory legal work fees.

12) A lien over the assets of the Hellenic Club is currently in force pending the settlement of the above pleaded debts. If the liened moneys owing are not forthcoming then foreclosure is imminent and title will be transferred to the Crown with your deemed consent without further notice. Understandably there is good reason why you would like to be owned and operated by the Crown. 2

SIGNATURE I acknowledge that court fees may be payable during these proceedings. These fees may include a hearing allocation fee. Signature Capacity Plaintiff Date of signature 23rd October 2013 NOTICE TO DEFENDANT

If you do not file a defence within 28 days of being served with this statement of claim:  You will be in default in these proceedings.  The court may enter judgment against you without any further notice to you. The judgment may be for the relief claimed in the statement of claim and for the plaintiff’s costs of bringing these proceedings. The court may provide third parties with details of any default judgment entered against you. HOW TO RESPOND

Please read this statement of claim very carefully. If you have any trouble understanding it or require assistance on how to respond to the claim you should get legal advice as soon as possible.

You can get further information about what you need to do to respond to the claim from:

 A legal practitioner.

 LawAccess NSW on 1300 888 529 or at www.lawaccess.nsw.gov.au.

 The court registry for limited procedural information.

You can respond in one of the following ways:

1 If you intend to dispute the claim or part of the claim, by filing a defence and/or making a cross-claim.

2 If money is claimed, and you believe you owe the money claimed, by:  Paying the plaintiff all of the money and interest claimed. If you file a notice of payment under UCPR 6.17 further proceedings against you will be stayed unless the court otherwise orders.  Filing an acknowledgement of the claim.  Applying to the court for further time to pay the claim. 3 If money is claimed, and you believe you owe part of the money claimed, by:  Paying the plaintiff that part of the money that is claimed.  Filing a defence in relation to the part that you do not believe is owed. Court forms are available on the UCPR website at www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/ucpr or at any NSW court registry.

REGISTRY ADDRESS Street address 7 Belmore St, Burwood, 2134 Postal address Box 235 Burwood 1805 Telephone 1300 679 272 [on separate page] [Do not include the affidavit verifying in Local Court proceedings. See Guide to preparing documents for other circumstances where affidavit not required.] #AFFIDAVIT VERIFYING Name Address Occupation Date

I [#say on oath #affirm]: 1 #I am the [first] plaintiff. #I am [give details of the capacity of the person making the affidavit and the facts that qualify the person to make the affidavit]. 2 I believe that the allegations of fact in the statement of claim are true.

#SWORN #AFFIRMED at Signature of deponent Name of witness Address of witness Capacity of witness [#Justice of the peace #Solicitor #Barrister #Commissioner for affidavits #Notary public]

And as a witness, I certify the following matters concerning the person who made this affidavit (the deponent): 1 #I saw the face of the deponent. [OR, delete whichever option is inapplicable] #I did not see the face of the deponent because the deponent was wearing a face covering, but I am satisfied that the deponent had a special justification for not removing the covering.* 2 #I have known the deponent for at least 12 months. [OR, delete whichever option is inapplicable] #I have confirmed the deponent’s identity using the following identification document:

Identification document relied on (may be original or certified copy) †

Signature of witness

Note: The deponent and witness must sign each page of the affidavit. See UCPR 35.7B.

______[* The only "special justification" for not removing a face covering is a legitimate medical reason (at April 2012).] [†"Identification documents" include current driver licence, proof of age card, Medicare card, credit card, Centrelink pension card, Veterans Affairs entitlement card, student identity card, citizenship certificate, birth certificate, passport or see Oaths Regulation 2011.] [on separate page] #PARTY DETAILS

[Include only if more than two plaintiffs and/or more than two defendants.] PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS Plaintiff[s] Defendant[s] [name] [role of party eg first plaintiff] [name] [role of party eg first defendant] [repeat as required for each additional plaintiff] [repeat as required for each additional defendant]

FURTHER DETAILS ABOUT PLAINTIFF[S] [First] plaintiff Name David Gregory Murphy Address 8/1 Curtin Place [The filing party must give the party's Concord 2137 address.]

Telephone 8214 8397 0419 605 365 Email [email protected] DETAILS ABOUT DEFENDANT[S] First Defendant Name THE HELLENIC CLUB LIMITED Address 251 Elizabeth St, Sydney NSW 2000 [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Second defendant Name MR ARTHUR BALAYANNIS Address 251 Elizabeth St, Sydney NSW 2000