Pead in Contempt of Court Hearing
The Royal Courts of Justice, Court
14 before Mr Justice Tugendhat
Pead v Lambeth Council, Pinsent Masons, Cathy Twist,
In the matter of
Contempt of Court by Brian Pead. This is the man who
is single-handedly harassing all of Lambeth Council’s
employees and the entire workforce of Pinsent Masons,
the international law firm “with a global reach”. And
Cathy Twist. And Phyllis Dunipace. So, this individual
is apparently causing alarm and distress to thousands
of people simultaneously.
Brian had received no
notification of this impending court action. He
certainly never heard a thing from the Court, although
the Court has details of his address and telephone
On the afternoon of 13th March
2013, he happened to come across a letter with his
name on it in the lobby belonging to his elderly
neighbour. For the record, Brian has no front door on
to the street. His own front door into the lobby owned
exclusively by his neighbour has no letterbox. Perhaps
this is the reason why letters addressed to him often
do not reach him. Many people had suggested that his
mail was being intercepted, but surely this can’t be
so. It must be because he has no letterbox that
letters fail to arrive, or those that do arrive are
often torn open or not even sealed! We have
photographic evidence to support this claim.
Upon seeing this
one-page letter from Pinsent Masons, Brian was caused
significant alarm and distress and went to see another
neighbour. Brian had no intention to commit the act of
Contempt of Court, which he believes to be a Common
Law misdemeanour in any event.
From his neighbour’s
house, Brian called Pinsent Masons and asked to speak
with James McBurney, the lawyer apparently handling
the case. Brian was told that McBurney was out, then
at his desk on another call … the familiar pattern.
Brian asked the female
to get Mr McBurney to call him back as it was an
He then told the female
that he was recording the call, at which point she
slammed the telephone down. The international law firm
with a global reach appears not to set aside much
funding towards staff training.
Throughout that entire
afternoon, Brian received no call from Pinsent Masons
or the court.
On his way to the Court,
Brian received an urgent telephone call from his
distressed 75-year-old female neighbour whose private
life had been violated by two “burly officers” from
Southend Police station. (This is an assumption
because they did not show ID and they did not tell her
where they were from.) They were in full uniform and
arrived in a marked police car. (This display is done
to alert all the neighbours in the vicinity and to
provide a show of force and reassurance that our tax
pounds are being well spent.) Her Article 8 Rights
under the Human Rights Act 1998 – the Right to Privacy
and Family life were violated by Southend Police, who
have caused her similar alarm and distress on two
previous occasions. This constitutes a “course of
conduct” under the Protection from Harassment Act
Upon arrival at Court,
Brian made his way to the Listings Office and was told
that a Contempt of Court Order would have to be made
and issued by the Court and not Pinsent Masons. Brian
asked why he had not been informed by the High Court
and was told that he had been informed on 25 February
2013. But he didn’t receive such a letter. (This is
part of the game they play. Don’t send him the
documents or letters and claim that HE is being
obdurate or even that he is lying by claiming that he
has not received the paperwork they HAVEN’T sent.
He then made his way to
Court 14. Mr Tugendhat was hearing another case, so
Brian made his way to the Public Gallery to complete
his notes for his own Hearing (not having been granted
sufficient time in which to prepare).
Mr Tugendhat did not
look very pleased to see Brian.
The first hearing (WXY v
Gewanter and Others) ended at 10:45.
represented the four parties. Pinsent Masons had
At 10:50, Ms Addy
attempted to serve 3 lever-arch files on Brian Pead.
He did not touch them or accept them as being served.
At 10:55, Ms Addy said,
“Mr Pead, may I ask you a question?” (She just had.)
10:58 and absolute
silence in Court, so much so that Brian heard the
The Court Usher asked
Caroline Addy and Pinsent Masons and Lambeth Council
if they were ready – she didn’t look at Brian Pead or
ask him if he was ready.
At 11:00 Judge Tugendhat
appeared in full robes.
Addy: I appeared before
you on 30 January 2013 to seek Orders against Mr Pead
on the grounds of privacy and harassment.
Judge:I am considering
whether I can proceed today or not. Mr Pead doesn’t
have legal representation.
Addy: Can I tell you
about informing Mr Pead?
Addy: We have included
in the bundle a Certificate of Service. We have
emails. Logs of phonecalls. He is uncontactable! We
say that Mr Pead has been properly served.
What he has not been
given is the hearing Bundle because we
cannot get it through his letterbox.
We asked a courier to
deliver the Bundle. Mr Pead has refused to co-operate.
You will have seen from
my skeleton argument that there was a defect because
it omitted the penal notice to attend.
We understand that Mr
Pead is entitled to Legal Aid.
Judge: Where is the
letter claiming service?
Addy: We know he
received it because he went to his website and ran a
story entitled ‘Harassment’.
Judge: Where is his
Not in the bundle. My bundle is not up to date.
I have a letter at 9A in the Bundle. It’s from Ms
Mills at Pinsent Masons who works with Mr McBurney.
The position is that Mr Pead declines to answer
emails/ letters or even answer the telephone. (She
forgot to add that he refuses to answer Unknown
numbers and they always call using Unknown numbers.
Evidence? The log of phonecalls on his mobile phone.)
Judge: I am still
considering the issue of representation…
He is entitled to …
This is an Application to commit you to prison for
Contempt of Court. The Court has the power to commit
you to prison for Contempt.
Pead: I wonder why you
are referring to only one of THREE possible options
for Contempt not that I believe I am guilty of
contempt in any event.
options, as you will know, include a fine or one’s
assets being seized. I have no assets.
Judge: I am referring to
the prison option because, since custody is available
to me, I am duty bound to ensure that you have legal
Pead:Well, I have with
me a copy of my Notes regarding Void Orders…
Judge:Did you prepare a
copy for the Court and Miss Addy?
No, I didn’t have sufficient time in which to prepare.
11:17 … copies being
made of Brian Pead’s notes.
Judge:Miss Addy, how long
is this Hearing listed for?
Addy:It is listed for 3
hours. We have to accede to Mr Pead’s right to obtain
Addy:Mr Pead needs to
have a fair process.
Judge:I am not asking you
to comment on Mr Pead’s rights.
going to rise for a few moments because of the
11:20 Brian Pead
asked a female sitting to his left the front of the
Court who she was. She replied that she was a court
reporter from Sweet and Maxwell.
11:25 The photocopying
of Brian Pead’s notes is completed.
Pead:In my notes, it
says: “A void order does not have to be obeyed
because, for example, in Crane v Director
of Public Prosecutions  it was stated
that if an order is void ab initio
(from the beginning), then there is no real Order of
And since they have
failed to serve me properly and committed other
breaches of the Civil Procedure Rules, I am declaring
the Order is Void and I do not have to comply with it.
Denning stated: “…A void order is incurably void and
all proceedings based on the invalid claim or void act
are also void. Even a decision of the higher courts
(High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court) will
be void if the decision is founded on an invalid claim
or void act, because something cannot be founded on
nothing…” MacFoy v United Africa Co.
Addy:We move to hear
again in 14 days.The
last day of the Michaelmas Term is 27 March 2013. We
say that Mr Pead should serve his evidence by 21 March
2013. Practice Direction 81, 15(4) states…
Judge:I haven’t got that.
(Yes, he truly said that! A High Court Judge did not
have on his bench the latest copy of the White Book
Addy: It’s in the 2nd
Pead:When does the new
term start please?
Judge:Mr Pead, this is a
court of unlimited jurisdiction. The Orders you claim
are Void are not Void until an application is made for
them to be declared by the Court as Void. Until then,
you must obey them. They have to be obeyed by
everybody, even you.
Pead:I request that this
Hearing commences in the new term, after 9 April 2013
in order to give me more time to locate a trustworthy
lawyer and for me to prepare my defence with that
Judge:I’m against you on
Pead:I thought you might
Judge:The hearing is on
27 March 2013.
interested in justice, free speech and rooting out
corruption should try to attend Court on the 27th. We
believe that the present justice system does not
like full public galleries because those in the
legal system are then more accountable because lots
of eyes are on them and they have no idea who will
be attending. For all they know, another Judge from
another part of the country, or an international
judge might be watching them. Please call 0756 400
2493 for more information on this case.
please click here .
Copyright. All Rights