PDA

View Full Version : Cestui Que Trust


barramoley
15-03-2010, 12:05 PM
80+ parliamentary discussions re CQT

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/search/cestui?page=9&sort=reverse_date

mark1963
15-03-2010, 03:06 PM
Thanks.

he said it was brasso
19-10-2010, 12:19 PM
So what is a cestui que trust exactly?

A legal definition states the following:

A person for whom another is a trustee: a beneficiary

A person as we know can be either a natural person (living breathing man or woman) or a legal fiction (company, institution, Government, etc).

When do you become a cestui que trust?


A definition for cestui que vie is as follows:

Where a person is entitled to an estate or interest in property during the life of another, the latter is called the cestui que vie.

Cestui que trust does seem to suggest that a person can be a beneficiary of another during their life.

So the benefactor (assuming they make a claim of right or whatever the term may be) becomes entitled to the estate (or interest in property) during the life of the other person (the cestui que vie).

The definition of estate is:

An interest in land

So what is land? One would assume it includes physical buildings and grounds and the definition I found includes:

Comprehendeth any ground, soile, or earth whatsoever...an easement, right, privilege or benefit in, over, or derived from land

Are you derived from land or to put it another way are you of the land? England, Scotland or the land of the Scots or Eng?

So that brings me onto the cestui que vie act 1666.

The act states:

An Act for Redresse of Inconveniencies by want of Proofe of the Deceases of Persons beyond the Seas or absenting themselves, upon whose Lives Estates doe depend.

I'd love to know exactly what that meant in 1666. Redress of inconveniences? Deceases of Persons (or deceased persons)? Beyond the Seas? Absenting themselves?

I think there is a lot more to this than meets the eye.

Discuss...

he said it was brasso
19-10-2010, 12:30 PM
interesting little site

http://wn.com/cestui_que_trust (http://wn.com/cestui_que_trust)

rumpole
19-10-2010, 12:35 PM
So what is a cestui que trust exactly?

A legal definition states the following:

A person for whom another is a trustee: a beneficiary

A person as we know can be either a natural person (living breathing man or woman) or a legal fiction (company, institution, Government, etc).

When do you become a cestui que trust?


A definition for cestui que vie is as follows:

Where a person is entitled to an estate or interest in property during the life of another, the latter is called the cestui que vie.

Cestui que trust does seem to suggest that a person can be a beneficiary of another during their life.

So the benefactor (assuming they make a claim of right or whatever the term may be) becomes entitled to the estate (or interest in property) during the life of the other person (the cestui que vie).

The definition of estate is:

An interest in land

So what is land? One would assume it includes physical buildings and grounds and the definition I found includes:

Comprehendeth any ground, soile, or earth whatsoever...an easement, right, privilege or benefit in, over, or derived from land

Are you derived from land or to put it another way are you of the land? England, Scotland or the land of the Scots or Eng?

So that brings me onto the cestui que vie act 1666.

The act states:

An Act for Redresse of Inconveniencies by want of Proofe of the Deceases of Persons beyond the Seas or absenting themselves, upon whose Lives Estates doe depend.

I'd love to know exactly what that meant in 1666. Redress of inconveniences? Deceases of Persons (or deceased persons)? Beyond the Seas? Absenting themselves?

I think there is a lot more to this than meets the eye.

Discuss...

It does happen that people just 'vanish'. Here's a modern example:-

Richey Edwards - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Obviously in 1666 things were less organised & people could disappear at sea or in wars etc without a trace.

Clearly it's an unsatisfactory state of affairs that matters surrounding their property would otherwise be left unresolved for many years. the law abhors a vacuum & hence the cestui que trust.

I think you're reading too much into this. It's just a method of tying up loose ends.

he said it was brasso
19-10-2010, 12:54 PM
It does happen that people just 'vanish'. Here's a modern example:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richey_Edwards

Obviously in 1666 things were less organised & people could disappear at sea or in wars etc without a trace.

Clearly it's an unsatisfactory state of affairs that matters surrounding their property would otherwise be left unresolved for many years. the law abhors a vacuum & hence the cestui que trust.

I think you're reading too much into this. It's just a method of tying up loose ends.

Perhaps you're not reading enough into it. :)

rumpole
19-10-2010, 01:02 PM
Perhaps you're not reading enough into it. :)


What am I missing?

free_thinker
19-10-2010, 02:07 PM
What am I missing?

The ability to take misunderstanding to new, hitherto unheard of heights.

he said it was brasso
19-10-2010, 02:07 PM
What am I missing?

I'm not sure. With regards to people going missing, are they not pronounced dead or missing anyway regardless of this act?

journohart
19-10-2010, 02:13 PM
Great link Barromoley!

I have been reading the Hansard writings and it appears these politicians back in the 18th Century are referring to the people or persons whenever they make mention of the cestui qui trust.

Take this one for example from: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1889/apr/03/second-reading#S3V0334P0_18890403_HOC_16

"I admit it was not a definite promise, but there was a pledge on the part of the Government that some consideration should be given to the case of these persons, and I desire to urge on the Chancellor of the Exchequer the claims cestui que trusts to have their income maintained at its former level. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is the guardian of the public, and he is to some extent opposed to any alteration in the law affecting investments in the interests of the public, because, as I understand him, he says that if we diverted the natural flow of investment into Consols we should thereby, to some extent, run the risk of lessening their value. I hope, on the other hand, to see the National Debt diminished and the value of Consols increased thereby. But while the Chancellor of the Exchequer speaks in this sense, he must consider the public from every point of view. I would rather, for my part, see the burden fall on the public as a whole than that it should fall on the persons least able to bear it—namely, the persons of small fixed incomes, who are generally without the power of earning more money for themselves. "

and

"Still, the Trusts and Settlements which have quite lately been made, and been made with a full knowledge of present cir-circumstances ought not to be set aside under the pressure of the cestui qui trust who may naturally be wishful to increase his income part passu probably with an increase of his family."

From: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/search/cestui?sort=reverse_date&speaker=mr-arthur-oconnor

"The very uncertainty of trusts now leads to heart burnings and to litigation, which always costs a great deal of money. It is perfectly true, also, that a cestui que trust, if he has reason for doubt, can get an injunction."

and

"The fact has been alluded to that there is an enormous increase in the trust funds of the country, and it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that if the cestui que trusts were consulted on the point there would be not a few of them in favour of the suggestion that means should be given to them of making investments of a first class kind."

I could go on and on ...

If that act were implied today I get that it means that we are the trusts ... the politicians use the people as the source of the money - like a farmer uses his cows as collateral for the things he needs.

The Cestui Qui Vie Act of 1666 gives a person 7 years to prove they are alive, therefore meaning we must each prove we are not "Cestui Que Trusts"/collateral.

My take on it is that this is how the game is won.

Your thoughts?

he said it was brasso
19-10-2010, 02:30 PM
Great link Barromoley!

I have been reading the Hansard writings and it appears these politicians back in the 18th Century are referring to the people or persons whenever they make mention of the cestui qui trust.

Take this one for example from: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1889/apr/03/second-reading#S3V0334P0_18890403_HOC_16

"I admit it was not a definite promise, but there was a pledge on the part of the Government that some consideration should be given to the case of these persons, and I desire to urge on the Chancellor of the Exchequer the claims cestui que trusts to have their income maintained at its former level. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is the guardian of the public, and he is to some extent opposed to any alteration in the law affecting investments in the interests of the public, because, as I understand him, he says that if we diverted the natural flow of investment into Consols we should thereby, to some extent, run the risk of lessening their value. I hope, on the other hand, to see the National Debt diminished and the value of Consols increased thereby. But while the Chancellor of the Exchequer speaks in this sense, he must consider the public from every point of view. I would rather, for my part, see the burden fall on the public as a whole than that it should fall on the persons least able to bear it—namely, the persons of small fixed incomes, who are generally without the power of earning more money for themselves. "

and

"Still, the Trusts and Settlements which have quite lately been made, and been made with a full knowledge of present cir-circumstances ought not to be set aside under the pressure of the cestui qui trust who may naturally be wishful to increase his income part passu probably with an increase of his family."

From: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/search/cestui?sort=reverse_date&speaker=mr-arthur-oconnor

"The very uncertainty of trusts now leads to heart burnings and to litigation, which always costs a great deal of money. It is perfectly true, also, that a cestui que trust, if he has reason for doubt, can get an injunction."

and

"The fact has been alluded to that there is an enormous increase in the trust funds of the country, and it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that if the cestui que trusts were consulted on the point there would be not a few of them in favour of the suggestion that means should be given to them of making investments of a first class kind."

I could go on and on ...

If that act were implied today I get that it means that we are the trusts ... the politicians use the people as the source of the money - like a farmer uses his cows as collateral for the things he needs.

The Cestui Qui Vie Act of 1666 gives a person 7 years to prove they are alive, therefore meaning we must each prove we are not "Cestui Que Trusts"/collateral.

My take on it is that this is how the game is won.

Your thoughts?

I assume you are older than 7 though :D

What do you propose?

bones
19-10-2010, 02:46 PM
What am I missing?

i wonder.:rolleyes:

rumpole
19-10-2010, 02:51 PM
Great link Barromoley!

I have been reading the Hansard writings and it appears these politicians back in the 18th Century are referring to the people or persons whenever they make mention of the cestui qui trust.

Take this one for example from: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1889/apr/03/second-reading#S3V0334P0_18890403_HOC_16

"I admit it was not a definite promise, but there was a pledge on the part of the Government that some consideration should be given to the case of these persons, and I desire to urge on the Chancellor of the Exchequer the claims cestui que trusts to have their income maintained at its former level. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is the guardian of the public, and he is to some extent opposed to any alteration in the law affecting investments in the interests of the public, because, as I understand him, he says that if we diverted the natural flow of investment into Consols we should thereby, to some extent, run the risk of lessening their value. I hope, on the other hand, to see the National Debt diminished and the value of Consols increased thereby. But while the Chancellor of the Exchequer speaks in this sense, he must consider the public from every point of view. I would rather, for my part, see the burden fall on the public as a whole than that it should fall on the persons least able to bear it—namely, the persons of small fixed incomes, who are generally without the power of earning more money for themselves. "

and

"Still, the Trusts and Settlements which have quite lately been made, and been made with a full knowledge of present cir-circumstances ought not to be set aside under the pressure of the cestui qui trust who may naturally be wishful to increase his income part passu probably with an increase of his family."

From: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/search/cestui?sort=reverse_date&speaker=mr-arthur-oconnor

"The very uncertainty of trusts now leads to heart burnings and to litigation, which always costs a great deal of money. It is perfectly true, also, that a cestui que trust, if he has reason for doubt, can get an injunction."

and

"The fact has been alluded to that there is an enormous increase in the trust funds of the country, and it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that if the cestui que trusts were consulted on the point there would be not a few of them in favour of the suggestion that means should be given to them of making investments of a first class kind."

I could go on and on ...

If that act were implied today I get that it means that we are the trusts ... the politicians use the people as the source of the money - like a farmer uses his cows as collateral for the things he needs.

The Cestui Qui Vie Act of 1666 gives a person 7 years to prove they are alive, therefore meaning we must each prove we are not "Cestui Que Trusts"/collateral.

My take on it is that this is how the game is won.

Your thoughts?

My thoughts are that generally Parliament legislate to solve a perceived problem. In this instance the problem was property that belonged to people who had for want of a better phrase 'dropped off the face of the earth' needed to be distributed in a fair & equitable manner. The 17th Century was a very dangerous & unstable century (30 years war, english civil war etc). It's clear there needed to be a mechanism to resolve unclaimed estates.

journohart
19-10-2010, 02:54 PM
Here's a bit more on that:
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1921/jun/23/draft-mandate-for-east-africa#S5LV0045P0_19210623_HOL_31

"If I may quote one passage from Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, I think it would be the easiest way of illustrating what I mean when I speak of the importance of the Mandate principle. The Mandates are to be applied to countries "inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world.' In other words, there is a recognition that in the relationship between more advanced countries and the less advanced countries the less advanced countries should be treated as in the nature of a cestui que trust, and their interests should be regarded as a primary duty by the Mandatory country, whatever it may be."

This one's a beauty - we are the chattle: http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1941/jun/17/trustee-war-damage-insurance-bill-hl#S5LV0119P0_19410617_HOL_5

"Well, my trust chattels in the next parish are almost out of danger; I do not think I should put my cestui que trust and the remainder men to the expense of insuring, and the tenant for life is not anxious that I should insure. He is quite willing I should not insure." One day the house is bombed; the trust chattels are destroyed, and the tenant for life is killed. Then come along some remote beneficiaries—it may be a hospital or they may be remote descendants of the settlor—and if the trustee has not insured the chattels, they 410 say: "You were prudent enough to insure your own chattels in the next parish, but not prudent enough to insure our chattels."

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1927/nov/11/clause-24-interpretation#S5CV0210P0_19271111_HOC_207

"Do the words include other persons beneficially interested in the rents and profits, a Cestui que trust, for instance, or an equitable mortgagee? And do they ever include a purchaser under a contract of sale, and, if so, in what circumstances do they include him?"

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1923/jul/20/clause-8-statutes-relating-to-trusts-and#S5CV0166P0_19230720_HOC_99

Hon. Members above the Gangway are credited, rightly or wrongly, with wishing to do what they like with other people's money, in fact, to socialise the living; but the right hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill wants to do very much more. He wants to socialise the dead, and, in fact, under a conspiracy between the trustees and the cestuique trust to do precisely what they like with the money of the dead.


http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1922/may/11/situation-in-ireland#S5LV0050P0_19220511_HOL_36

"They are in possession of all the records under which minors, cestui que trusts, and other people entitled to properties administered by the Court, receive their moneys. If all those documents were destroyed it would throw into utter chaos every one of the estates concerned."

This was mentioned back in 2004:

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/2004/dec/07/86a-process-for-making-rules-of-court#S5LV0667P0_20041207_HOL_1925

Lord Kingsland
"My Lords, I recall that when this matter came to your Lordships' attention earlier this year, the question was posed to the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor by the noble Lord, Lord Renton, about the Cestui que Vie Act 1707. Has the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor had the opportunity to delve into the mysteries of this legislation and take the matter up with the noble Lord?"

rumpole
19-10-2010, 02:59 PM
I'm not sure. With regards to people going missing, are they not pronounced dead or missing anyway regardless of this act?

i wonder.:rolleyes:

Both of you seem to be implying there are hidden (& perhaps nefarious) reasons behind the 1666 Act but are unwilling (or unable) to articulate what they are?

Bones,as a well regarded fixture of this forum & big time FMOTL 'thinker' surely you have an answer?

journohart
19-10-2010, 03:24 PM
I assume you are older than 7 though

What do you propose?

Yeah, just a little older :)

I believe this to be THE solution for the world.

The elite if they are indeed the farmers of the people will do their best to keep this type of truth from the masses and thus pass on their power/thiis knowledge to their children. That is why it is not public knoweldge ... if it were people wouldn't be able to be farmed.

People always talk about creating a better world for their children and grand children ... well what if this is it for the truthseekers.

Perhaps every "Divine Immortal Spirit" who takes responsibility for their own life can do nothing for themselves (as they are older than 7), but can for their children.

It seems to me the remedy lies in providing a proof of life form, with each child's (under 7) thumbprint to the relevant person (High Court I think).

Here is an example from a Government website no less. (It is form 206): http://www.courtfunds.gov.uk/forms/forms_cfo.htm
Here is the Cest Que Vie Act 1666: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/aep/1666/caep_16660011_en_1

The important part there being: Cestui que vie remaining beyond Sea for Seven Years together and no Proof of their Lives, Judge in Action to direct a Verdict as though Cestui que vie were dead

If such person or persons for whose life or lives such Estates have beene or shall be granted as aforesaid shall remaine beyond the Seas or elsewhere absent themselves in this Realme by the space of seaven yeares together and noe sufficient and evident proofe be made of the lives of such person or persons respectively in any Action commenced for recovery of such Tenements by the Lessors or Reversioners in every such case the person or persons upon whose life or lives such Estate depended shall be accounted as naturally dead, And in every Action brought for the recovery of the said Tenements by the Lessors or Reversioners their Heires or Assignes, the Judges before whom such Action shall be brought shall direct the Jury to give their Verdict as if the person soe remaining beyond the Seas or otherwise absenting himselfe were dead.

Does anyone know if this has been done before?

he said it was brasso
19-10-2010, 06:50 PM
Yeah, just a little older :)

I believe this to be THE solution for the world.

The elite if they are indeed the farmers of the people will do their best to keep this type of truth from the masses and thus pass on their power/thiis knowledge to their children. That is why it is not public knoweldge ... if it were people wouldn't be able to be farmed.

People always talk about creating a better world for their children and grand children ... well what if this is it for the truthseekers.

Perhaps every "Divine Immortal Spirit" who takes responsibility for their own life can do nothing for themselves (as they are older than 7), but can for their children.

It seems to me the remedy lies in providing a proof of life form, with each child's (under 7) thumbprint to the relevant person (High Court I think).

Here is an example from a Government website no less. (It is form 206): http://www.courtfunds.gov.uk/forms/forms_cfo.htm
Here is the Cest Que Vie Act 1666: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/aep/1666/caep_16660011_en_1



Does anyone know if this has been done before?

If indeede this were possible then perhaps any personae could indeede do soe for themselves as it looks like a cestui que vie can declare themselves alive at any pointe.

Apologies for the 1666 spin on it

journohart
20-10-2010, 12:02 AM
... it looks like a cestui que vie can declare themselves alive at any pointe.

Doesn't it give the person 7 years from the time they are pronounced "missing at sea" to show proof of life?

brianthebrain
20-10-2010, 02:45 PM
Doesn't it give the person 7 years from the time they are pronounced "missing at sea" to show proof of life?


only if they dont want their property given away, they can show themselves, to be alive at any point, why dont you read it yourself

journohart
21-10-2010, 01:33 AM
only if they dont want their property given away, they can show themselves, to be alive at any point, why dont you read it yourself

Thanks Brian. :rolleyes:

Obviously Brian you can take the 1666 Act to mean you are "missing at sea" and reclaim your property at any point within those 7 years. Yes it states that and logically it is reffering to people who had gone missing.

But if the people, after they turn 7, are then reffered to as Cest Que Trusts, check the Hansard links - some references to people being Cestui Que trusts are made this decade - then it would imply there is a deeper mystery.

The Act these days, as opposed to what was going on when the first act was brought in in 1666, means if you can prove you are alive before age 7 then you can claim that trust account as yours.

Its really that simple. The trust account exists but you must show proof of life before you are 7 to claim it - otherwise it is not available to you, hence the A4V is not consistently working for people. :)

swiftex
21-10-2010, 04:06 AM
Thanks Brian. :rolleyes:

Obviously Brian you can take the 1666 Act to mean you are "missing at sea" and reclaim your property at any point within those 7 years. Yes it states that and logically it is reffering to people who had gone missing.

But if the people, after they turn 7, are then reffered to as Cest Que Trusts, check the Hansard links - some references to people being Cestui Que trusts are made this decade - then it would imply there is a deeper mystery.

The Act these days, as opposed to what was going on when the first act was brought in in 1666, means if you can prove you are alive before age 7 then you can claim that trust account as yours.

Its really that simple. The trust account exists but you must show proof of life before you are 7 to claim it - otherwise it is not available to you, hence the A4V is not consistently working for people. :)


go brother go! :D

up to my *%^# with appeals etc., at present and can't be much help...:)


...............................:D

brianthebrain
21-10-2010, 05:17 AM
Thanks Brian. :rolleyes:

Obviously Brian you can take the 1666 Act to mean you are "missing at sea" and reclaim your property at any point within those 7 years. Yes it states that and logically it is reffering to people who had gone missing.

But if the people, after they turn 7, are then reffered to as Cest Que Trusts, check the Hansard links - some references to people being Cestui Que trusts are made this decade - then it would imply there is a deeper mystery.

The Act these days, as opposed to what was going on when the first act was brought in in 1666, means if you can prove you are alive before age 7 then you can claim that trust account as yours.

Its really that simple. The trust account exists but you must show proof of life before you are 7 to claim it - otherwise it is not available to you, hence the A4V is not consistently working for people. :)

YOUR USING LOGIC BACKWARDS

CQV trusts arnt the same as the fictitious a4v

that aside, your working from the premise that a4v exists and try to explain why it doesnt work when people try to claim them,, rather than going for the far more obvious route of trying to prove they are real first

journohart
21-10-2010, 05:36 AM
CQV trusts arnt the same as the fictitious a4v

that aside, your working from the premise that a4v exists and try to explain why it doesnt work when people try to claim them,, rather than going for the far more obvious route of trying to prove they are real first

So is it your belief that there is no trust account set up for/or on behalf of the people from birth Brian?

killmicrosoft
21-10-2010, 08:02 AM
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/cestui+que
cestui que
0.06 sec.

[french, he or she who.] the person for whom a benefit exists.

A cestui que trust is a person for whose benefit a trust is created; a beneficiary. Although legal title of the trust is vested in the trustee, the cestui que trust is the beneficiary who is entitled to all benefits from a trust.

A cestui que use is an archaic term of property law that describes one who has a beneficial interest in land held by someone else. Title and possession as well as the duty to defend the land is held by another, but the cestui que use has the right to rents, profits, and other benefits from the land.

A cestui que vie is the person whose life is used to measure various things, such as the duration of a trust, a gift, or an insurance contract. It can also be used to mean the person upon whose life a policy of life insurance is drawn.


http://www.duhaime.org/legaldictionary/c/cestuiquetrustorcestuiqueuse.aspx
modern trust law prefers the word beneficiary but the older cases refer to the older latin term of cestui que trust.

In green v underhill, justice romer adopted these words:

"a trust is an equitable obligation binding a person (who is called a trustee) to deal with property over which he has control (which is called the trust property) for the benefit of persons (who are called beneficiaries or cestui que trust) of whom he may himself be one, and anyone of whom may enforce the obligation. Any act or neglect on the part of a trustee which is not authorised or excused by the terms of the trust instrument, or by law, is a breach of trust."

----


http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/cestui-que-trust/
cestui que trust law & legal definition

a cestui que trust is a formal latin term referring to a beneficiary having an equitable interest in a trust, with the legal title being vested to the trustee. The law looks with suspicion upon transactions between trustees and beneficiaries, and, when the cestui que trust sells trust property to the trustee, the burden is placed upon the grantee or trustee to whom such transfer is made to show that the grantor or cestue que trust was in possession of full information and acted upon her own volition or independent advice, and free from all influence of the grantee or trustee to whom such transfer is made.

-----

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-cestui-que-trust.htm
a cestui que trust or cestui que use is a beneficiary of a trust. This archaic legal term has been largely replaced by “beneficiary” in most legal documents, although it is still encountered in some settings. “cestui que” meaning “that person” is also used in some other senses, like “cestui que vie” to refer to a person whose life is used as a milestone or landmark for something, like the insured party on a life insurance policy. This term originates from the french language.

The cestui que trust has a named equity in a trust, but does not have legal title. A trust may include several individuals named as beneficiaries, as for example in a family trust where all the children in a marriage have an equitable share in the trust. The trust is managed by a trustee. Trustees are responsible for handling the trust, making decisions about how to use the assets in the trust, and preserving the contents of the trust for the beneficiaries.

Trusts are structured in a number of different ways. The cestui que trust can receive regular payments or other benefits from the trust, or the trust may be used to hold property for someone. As an example, if young children are orphaned by their parents, a trustee might hold their family home in trust until they come of age, allowing them to stay at home under the care of a guardian without losing the rights to the home.

Once a trust is established, it is difficult to revoke, making it important to structure trusts carefully. The cestui que trust must also use care in dealings with the trustee. Suspicions are naturally aroused when business dealings between trustees and beneficiaries occur, and the trustee is obligated to document any dealings to confirm their validity and make it clear that no coercion or other pressures were involved. Likewise, the trustee must also document all decisions made about the trust to justify them; if assets are sold, for example, the trustee must show when, how, and why, and must document that the proceeds of the sale were put back into the trust or used to cover expenses directly related to the trust.
Related topics

ownership of assets in a trust may revert to the cestui que trust when a triggering event occurs, while in other cases, it may be held permanently by the trustee or appointed agents. Some historic homes, for example, are held in trust for conservation purposes, and cannot legally be sold or transferred.


-------

http://www.law-dictionary.org/cestui+que+trust.asp?q=cestui+que+trust
cestui que trust
cestui que trust, a barbarous phrase, to signify the beneficiary of an estate held in trust. He for whose benefit another person is enfeoffed or estate held in trust. He for whose benefit another person is enfeoffed or seised of land or tenements, or is possessed of personal property. The seised of land or tenements, or is possessed of personal property. The cestui que trust is entitled to receive the rents and profits of the land; cestui que trust is entitled to receive the rents and profits of the land; he may direct such conveyances, consistent with the trust, deed or will, as he may direct such conveyances, consistent with the trust, deed or will, as he shall choose, and the trustee (q.v.) is bound to execute them: He may he shall choose, and the trustee (q.v.) is bound to execute them: He may defend his title in the name of the trustee. 1 cruise, dig. Tit. 12, c. 4, defend his title in the name of the trustee. 1 cruise, dig. Tit. 12, c. 4, s. 4; vide vin. Ab. Trust, u, w, x, and y 1 vern. 14; dane's ab. Index, s. 4; vide vin. Ab. Trust, u, w, x, and y 1 vern. 14; dane's ab. Index, h.t.: 1 story, eq. Jur. Sec. 321, note 1; bouv. Inst. Index, h.t. H.t.: 1 story, eq. Jur. Sec. 321, note 1; bouv. Inst. Index, h.t.

hadabusa
21-10-2010, 08:13 AM
So is it your belief that there is no trust account set up for/or on behalf of the people from birth Brian?

whens it created?

during pregnancy?

journohart
21-10-2010, 12:30 PM
whens it created?

during pregnancy?

No when the birth of a child is registered with the Government via birth certificate.

brianthebrain
21-10-2010, 01:55 PM
So is it your belief that there is no trust account set up for/or on behalf of the people from birth Brian?

yes thats my belief, there is no evidence and by evidence i mean verifiable documentation, that such exist or have ever existed

it seems to be a flight of fancy, which started in the US, where clearly they dont have the CQV act 1666 anyway, and has been mutated to try and fit UK circumstances

the poster above has given comprehensive definition of a CQV trust and it clearly doesnt fit the criteria of A4

dont get me wrong. id love it to be true, but failing any evidence that it is, il have to pass at the moment

journohart
22-10-2010, 12:52 AM
OK. I have not seen the 100% certain proof that one exists either however I know that one of the major claims by many trailblazers in the Freeman movement is that such a Trust exists.

Certain proof to me would of course be a court case where it is mentioned. Official Government document or even someone who came along and paid my mortgage (and everyone else I know who has a mortgage) from their trust fund.

I wonder then if anyone here has the undeniable proof that a Trust account is created upon the registry of a person's birth?

With regard to A4V isn't the process like this: the natural man is ordering the corporation to retrieve the necessary funds to remedy the bill by giving them the necessary info to settle the liability from the person's trust account?

earthicastar
22-10-2010, 07:33 AM
Congress Mocking the Obama Birth Certificate - YouTube

he said it was brasso
22-10-2010, 09:47 AM
[video removed by me]

At least they admit that the birth certificate ties you in to the system and debt

mfrey0118
22-10-2010, 03:29 PM
A person as we know can be either a natural person (living breathing man or woman) or a legal fiction (company, institution, Government, etc).


I believe the term "natural person" also refers to a legal fiction, and grants jurisdiction to the commercial court. Several people have mentioned the lack of success using this term to identify a Living Soul in court.

mfrey0118
22-10-2010, 03:48 PM
OK. I have not seen the 100% certain proof that one exists either however I know that one of the major claims by many trailblazers in the Freeman movement is that such a Trust exists.

Certain proof to me would of course be a court case where it is mentioned. Official Government document or even someone who came along and paid my mortgage (and everyone else I know who has a mortgage) from their trust fund.

I wonder then if anyone here has the undeniable proof that a Trust account is created upon the registry of a person's birth?

With regard to A4V isn't the process like this: the natural man is ordering the corporation to retrieve the necessary funds to remedy the bill by giving them the necessary info to settle the liability from the person's trust account?
What about the bond that is issued on the BC by the Treasury? I heard that if you have a good broker, you can give him the birth certificate file/registration numbers and he can track it in the market. Can anyone confirm or deny?
And the corporate US is still owned by the Crown (see Treaty of 1783 for one) so it is likely if this is done in the UK there is some kind of counterpart in the US.

mfrey0118
22-10-2010, 03:52 PM
OK. I have not seen the 100% certain proof that one exists either however I know that one of the major claims by many trailblazers in the Freeman movement is that such a Trust exists.

I believe this angle is being explored in great detail in the Creditor movement, not Freeman. Creditors are attempting to achieve Trustee or Creditor status in regards to their corporate fictions, and work within the legal realm (see: Creditors in Commerce websites) while Freemen are simply trying to extricate themselves from it and answer only to Common Law.

brianthebrain
22-10-2010, 03:52 PM
I heard that if you have a good broker, you can give him the birth certificate file/registration numbers and he can track it in the market.
.

ive heard that if you find the end of a rainbow, there is a pot of gold,

ive not found anyone who has actual found the gold though

journohart
23-10-2010, 12:22 PM
I believe this angle is being explored in great detail in the Creditor movement, not Freeman. Creditors are attempting to achieve Trustee or Creditor status in regards to their corporate fictions, and work within the legal realm (see: Creditors in Commerce websites) while Freemen are simply trying to extricate themselves from it and answer only to Common Law.

Thanks Mfrey. Yes I know about Creditors In Commerce but hadn't figured there was a technical difference between their methods and Freeman on the Land philosophy.

ive heard that if you find the end of a rainbow, there is a pot of gold,

Thank you Brian. So true, the clues to the truth are all around us. We just assume it is someones creativity ... but there is, the majority of the time, truth to the old fables. :)

mfrey0118
23-10-2010, 06:02 PM
ive heard that if you find the end of a rainbow, there is a pot of gold,

ive not found anyone who has actual found the gold though

Hence the "...confirm or deny?" you conveniently left out of the quote. Let me see if I can rack my brain about where I read/heard this. I've watched so many videos and read so much information recently it's all a bit blurry. But this person wasn't some hack on the forums, it was a rather well known person in these circles, I believe...

OK, here's an article confirming but this is not where I heard/read it originally but it says basically the same thing. You can make up your mind for yourself.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Redemption-Of-Your-Strawman

The Birth Certificate

The first question I would like to discuss is the question of the Birth Certificate. Is it an Instrument of Commerce? Is it a Promissory note? Does your Birth Certificate have any actual Commercial Worth?

The answer to these questions is NO! It gives the authorization to produce a Certificate of Live Birth. The parents and/or the doctor are given an application which is ultimately a Commercial Contract. All your Local or State Birth Certificate is evidence that there has been a Commercial Contract entered which makes the free born living baby a ward of the State.

In a couple of weeks the actual Certificate of Live Birth which was based on the application is handed over to and filed in Washington D.C. The Certificate of Live Birth is a bonded instrument. On the reverse of the Certificate is a single letter (A-N) followed by eight numbers. In recent times the same Serial Number of the Bond is stamped on the back of a Social Security Card.

The second thing I would like to discuss is the Birth Certificate itself. The Original Birth Certificate which had been prepared in the County of your Birth. Is it a contract giving the State control over everything associated with the individual named on the Certificate?

The answer to this question is also NO! Your Birth Certificate itself is not a contract and has no actual value. It is simply evidence that a Live Birth has transpired. That particular Certificate is filed in the Official records in Washington D.C.. This Certificate is irrefutable evidence that a living,breathing person who has had their existence Registered with the State and various Federal Agencies.

Even those Born on Foreign Ground are filed with either a Certificate of Naturalization, Citizenship or any other document which gives them authorization to remain in residence in the country. It is Public Agencies that specify the name on the document as an actual person.

The Certificate of Live Birth receives its value based on the power of the State to tax the future wealth and property of the Debtor. The Department of the Treasury issues a Bond with the Bond Number stamped on the reverse of the Certificate of Live Birth.

There have been some prints of Individual Master Files (IMF) that show the Bond placed on the newborn of a value of around $650.000 dollars. There is a catch. Any profit which is created by the investment during the life right up to the death of the individual of every living, breathing male or female remains the property of the State.

girlgye
23-10-2010, 06:35 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mV9-bgSrV_s

Ah thank God for the clued up on here.

alisa2
23-10-2010, 07:35 PM
At least they admit that the birth certificate ties you in to the system and debt

If they admit that the birth certificate ties you in to the system, they aren't American politicians.

In reality, and in the history of American law, the birth certificate is not tied in any way to an obligation to pay a debt. How valid can the debt be if the only thing binding person to it is a birth certificate? That politician should be asking the question how money is created in this country. That’s the real problem, and that's the only problem politicians should be talking about.

alisa2
23-10-2010, 07:56 PM
Eustace Mullins:

Darma states that it is the desire for the life of form which produces the universe, that there is a World Order by which the universe is upheld.

The natural World Order, which is based upon the irrevocable laws of the universe, has been temporarily replaced on Earth by the unnatural World Order of the parasite. All of the programs and energies of the parasite are devoted to a single goal, maintaining his feeding position upon the host.

Freudian psychology was developed by the parasitic order to neutralize the incessant efforts of the host to throw off or dislodge the parasite. Any move to dislodge the parasite is denounced as “reactionary”. It is defined and outlawed as an act of aggression, hostility, and alienation. In fact, the host is
merely trying to survive by throwing off the parasite. Another law of nature is that the parasite, not only by sucking off the life sustenance of the host, but also by altering its life cycle, will inevitably kill the host. This process is called “the decline and fall of civilization”.

LaPage notes that a parasite is not a particular species, but one which has adopted a certain way of life, the way of the parasite. Whether or not it is a virus, the parasite has a viral effect on the host, slowly poisoning and destroying it. Viruses are classic parasites. The spirochete, virus of syphilis, is
a classic parasitic organism. In biological parlance, a collection of spirochetes is known as a “Congress”.

The U.S. Congress has specifically chartered many parasitic functions in the philanthropic foundations. These groups now dominate educational and governmental institutions, laying down financial and social goals which are designed solely to maintain the hegemony of parasitism through its World Order. The American foundations are not even run by Americans; their policies are formulated in London by the financiers and transmitted to this country through the British Army Bureau..."

[snip]

We well may ask, if the World Order is in control, why do we need an “Institute for World Order” Why do we need the foundations as Gauleiters of the Order’s control ? The answer is that the World Order rules because it conceals its power; it denies that it exists. Although its power is obvious everywhere, in the government, in education, in the religious orders, in the wars and revolutions and famines which are so meticulously planned and executed, the World Order, like the Mafia, refuses to acknowledge its own existence. Its subsidiaries come and go, but the Order remains constant. When too many people discover the Council on Foreign Relations, power is moved into the Bilderbergers, or the Trilateral Commission. The Order’s control remains constant.

alisa2
23-10-2010, 08:25 PM
Our educational system:

The U.S. Congress has specifically chartered many parasitic functions in the philanthropic foundations. These groups now dominate educational and governmental institutions, laying down financial and social goals, which are designed solely to maintain the hegemony of parasitism through its World Order. The American foundations are not even run by Americans; their policies are formulated in London by the financiers and transmitted to this country through the British Army Bureau of Psychological Warfare front Tavistock Institute. This is a typical disguised parasitic operation.


The foundations never oppose or contradict a single plank of the
Communist Manifesto. The program has given us “vocational training” instead of education, which is a different form of child labour.

journohart
24-10-2010, 12:06 PM
Nice posts Alisa 2. As the system tightens its grip on humanity more and more people will feel its effects and thus there is a reaction ... hence the increase in reported "mental disorders".

There is something wrong with the world, they do not have the knowledge to put it into words, however their body tells them different and there is a breakdown. Medications are brought in to surpress these feelings and a sense of "normality" resumes. I wonder how a recently diagnosed bipolar sufferer may react by the revelations of the Freeman movement. If that would be an adequate cure?

I'm not sure if all mental disorders are a result of a system which wants to surpress enlightening info but there is the consensus that all mentall ill people have a higher intelligence than the norm ...


There have been some prints of Individual Master Files (IMF) that show the Bond placed on the newborn of a value of around $650.000 dollars. There is a catch. Any profit which is created by the investment during the life right up to the death of the individual of every living, breathing male or female remains the property of the State.

MFrey. Does this mean the $650,000 is available to those who redeem their strawman through the processes the guys at Creditors in Commerce pursue.

And going back to my original search for truth ... can someone's offspring, if they are under 7, have a proof of life form given to the relevant persons within the system so that they can access this bond freely?

dolores1
24-10-2010, 05:59 PM
Both of you seem to be implying there are hidden (& perhaps nefarious) reasons behind the 1666 Act but are unwilling (or unable) to articulate what they are?

Bones,as a well regarded fixture of this forum & big time FMOTL 'thinker' surely you have an answer?


When TPTB set the great fire of london in 1666; it was no accident; the corporation of London rushed to Parliament, that house of lies, and drew up this Act of Parliment, Cestui qu Vie? which declared everyone dead.:mad:


When the fire was out the people no longer owned the land :mad: This land between Bread Street and Pudding Lane; became the "City". No longer part of England!:D


This company called The Crown is where all your taxes go!mad:


This made living humans Persons "The Crown" was set up and they OWNED the PERSONS, the strawmen - you!:mad::mad:


No one knew that they had to claim they were alive before the age of 7 and now we Certify our own children!:mad:


You - the Person- by way of your birth certificate, the original document, are traded everyday on the City's London Stock Exchange. :eek::mad:

You are a slave!:eek:

brianthebrain
24-10-2010, 09:09 PM
When TPTB set the great fire of london in 1666; it was no accident; the corporation of London rushed to Parliament, that house of lies, and drew up this Act of Parliment, Cestui qu Vie? which declared everyone dead.:mad:




just repeating the same lie over again doesnt make it true, please show me the bit of the act that say anybody let alone everybody is dead

rumpole
25-10-2010, 08:12 AM
When TPTB set the great fire of london in 1666; it was no accident; the corporation of London rushed to Parliament, that house of lies, and drew up this Act of Parliment, Cestui qu Vie? which declared everyone dead.:mad:


When the fire was out the people no longer owned the land :mad: This land between Bread Street and Pudding Lane; became the "City". No longer part of England!:D


This company called The Crown is where all your taxes go!mad:


This made living humans Persons "The Crown" was set up and they OWNED the PERSONS, the strawmen - you!:mad::mad:


No one knew that they had to claim they were alive before the age of 7 and now we Certify our own children!:mad:


You - the Person- by way of your birth certificate, the original document, are traded everyday on the City's London Stock Exchange. :eek::mad:

You are a slave!:eek:

Simply wrong. The Cestui qu Vie Act was passed into law as a response to the great plague in 1665. Casualties from the great fire were thankfully minimal & the government set up a special fire court to deal with property claims. On the other hand there were 80,000 extra deaths in London alone during 1665. Record keeping & administration to some extent fell away as officials fled the city. 1000's were anonymously tossed into plague pits & no one had the time or inclination to properly identify them.

dolores1
25-10-2010, 09:48 AM
Read the Title of the Act

brianthebrain
25-10-2010, 06:35 PM
Read the Title of the Act

?????????????????????

would you care to elucidate ?

earthicastar
25-10-2010, 06:51 PM
It only exists if you agree that it does.. just like government, and money... it does not exist in nature.. it is only real to those who 'believe' in it

i was not capable of understanding or agreeing to anything before I was 7 other than penut butter and jelly.. so anything gotten by deception, is fraud, and anything that is fraud is VOID... 'ab initio'


it is Peter Pan

bones
25-10-2010, 08:56 PM
just repeating the same lie over again doesnt make it true, please show me the bit of the act that say anybody let alone everybody is dead


would such proof exist?

or are you as fucking stupid as rumple?

really pinky just because there might be no proof dont me it aint true.


tut tut tut.

rumpole
25-10-2010, 09:38 PM
would such proof exist?

or are you as fucking stupid as rumple?

really pinky just because there might be no proof dont me it aint true.


tut tut tut.


At the very most it makes it an 'unproven theory' (I'm referring the whole 'birth certificate = £millions I can perhaps get access to' story)

carl0599
25-10-2010, 10:35 PM
just repeating the same lie over again doesnt make it true,

Thanks Brian for that ..........................

The irony is lost i guess:)

just one point i believe we need not refer to anyone as TPTB as if we think about who really is TPTB and dont come to the conclusion that it really is each one of us we are still slaves

Rumpole is there any significance to being missing for 7 years to be declared dead for insurance purposes??

bones
25-10-2010, 11:03 PM
At the very most it makes it an 'unproven theory' (I'm referring the whole 'birth certificate = £millions I can perhaps get access to' story)


true.

:)

mfrey0118
27-10-2010, 02:07 PM
MFrey. Does this mean the $650,000 is available to those who redeem their strawman through the processes the guys at Creditors in Commerce pursue.


From what I've gathered so far, the "gurus" in the Creditor movement are trying to steer people clear of things like trying to access their Treasury accounts because people have been going to jail for it. If it really is true, one has to assume the government would make it incredibly difficult, if not impossible, for those who find the truth to actually access the account.

dolores1
30-10-2010, 06:06 PM
just repeating the same lie over again doesnt make it true, please show me the bit of the act that say anybody let alone everybody is dead

The very name of the Act Cestui que vie?

If they had not claimed that all were dead why would anyone have to claim to be alive?

brianthebrain
30-10-2010, 06:38 PM
The very name of the Act Cestui que vie?



what do you suppose cestui que vie translates as ?

swiftex
30-10-2010, 10:27 PM
what do you suppose cestui que vie translates as ?


Please explain...

.............

daveyoung52
11-06-2011, 09:46 PM
who would call himself brianthebrain anyway.

rumpelstilzchen
11-06-2011, 09:50 PM
who would call himself brianthebrain anyway.

brianthebrain would.

lesactive
14-06-2011, 07:08 PM
who would call himself brianthebrain anyway.

along the lines of:

grammarianthehelpful
infidelyorkthenice
wipsythegracious
ben10themagnaminous
outofstatethepagan
micklemustheconvert
eidelweissthemason
hadabusathesincere
rumpelstilzchentheopen

couldn't resist :rolleyes:

girlgye
14-06-2011, 07:09 PM
along the lines of:

grammarianthehelpful
infidelyorkthenice
wipsythegracious
ben10themagnaminous
outofstatethepagan
micklemustheconvert
eidelweissthemason
hadabusathesincere
rumpelstilzchentheopen

couldn't resist :rolleyes:

Oh. Water water water.

:(

girlgye
14-06-2011, 07:10 PM
x ;)

lesactive
14-06-2011, 07:15 PM
x ;)

xo

chessnut
08-12-2011, 11:58 PM
Just found this at http://one-heaven.org/canons_positive_law/article_1000.htm


3.2 Rights Suspension and Corruption
Article 100-Cestui Que Vie Trust
Canon 2036
A Cestui Que Vie Trust, also known later as a "Fide Commissary Trust" and later again as a “Foreign Situs trust” and also known as a form of “Secret Trust” is a fictional concept being a Temporary Testamentary Trust, first created during the reign of Henry VIII of England through the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1540 and updated by Charles II through the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666 wherein an Estate may be effected for the Benefit of one or more Persons presumed lost or abandoned at “sea” and therefore assumed “dead” after seven (7) years. Additional presumptions by which such a Trust may be formed were added in later statutes to include bankrupts, minors, incompetents, mortgages and private companies.
Canon 2037
The original purpose and function of a Cestui Que (Vie) Trust was to form a temporary Estate for the benefit of another because some event, state of affairs or condition prevented them from claiming their status as living, competent and present before a competent authority. Therefore, any claims, history, statutes or arguments that deviate in terms of the origin and function of a Cestui Que (Vie) Trust as pronounced by these canons is false and automatically null and void. A Cestui Que (Vie) Trust may only exist for seventy (70) years being the traditional accepted "life" expectancy of the estate.
Canon 2038
A Beneficiary under Estate may be either a Beneficiary or a Cestui Que (Vie) Trust. When a Beneficiary loses direct benefit of any Property of the higher Estate placed in Cestui Que (Vie) Trust on their behalf, they do not “own” the Cestui Que (Vie) Trust and are only the beneficiary of what the Trustees of the Cestui Que (Vie) Trust choose to provide them.
Canon 2039
As all Cestui Que (Vie) Trusts are created on one or more presumptions based on its original purpose and function, such a Trust cannot be created if none of these presumptions can be proven to exist.
Canon 2040
The Trust Corpus created by a Cestui Que (Vie) is also known as the Estate from two Latin words e+statuo literally meaning “by virtue of decree, statute or judgment”. However, as the Estate is held in a Temporary not permanent Trust, the (Corporate) Person as Beneficiary is entitled only to equitable title and the use of the Property, rather than legal title and therefore ownership of the Property. Only the Corporation, also known as Body Corporate, Estate and Trust Corpus of a Cestui Que (Vie) Trust possesses valid legal personality.
Canon 2041
The Property of any Estate created through a Temporary (Testamentary) Trust may be regarded as under “Cestui Que Use” by the Corporate Person, even if another name or description is used to define the type of trust or use. Therefore “Cestui Que Use is not a Person but a Right and therefore a form of "property".
Canon 2042
In 1534, prior to the 1st Cestui Que Vie Act (1540), Henry VIII declared the first Cestui Que Vie type estate with the Act of Supremecy which created the Crown Estate. In 1604, seventy (70) years later, James I of England modified the estate as the Crown Union (Union of Crowns). By the 18th Century, the Crown was viewed as a company. However by the start of the 19th Century around 1814 onwards upon the bankruptcy of the company (1814/15) , it became the fully private Crown Corporation controlled by European private banker families.
Canon 2043
Since 1581, there has been a second series of Cestui Que Vie Estates concerning the property of "persons" and rights which migrated to the United States for administration including:
(i) In 1651 the Act for the Settlement of Ireland 1651-52 which introduced the concept of "settlements", enemies of the state and restrictions of movement in states of "emeregency"; and
(ii) In 1861 the Emergency Powers Act 1861; and
(iii) In 1931 the Emergency Relief and Construction Act 1931-32; and
(iv) in 2001 the Patriot Act 2001.
Canon 2044
Since 1591, there has been a third series of Cestui Que Vie Estates concerning the property of "soul" and ecclesiastical rights which migrated to the United States for administration including:
(i) In 1661 the Act of Settlement 1661-62; and
(ii) In1871 the District of Columbia Act 1871; and
(iii) In 1941 the Lend Lease Act 1941.
Canon 2045
By 1815 and the bankruptcy of the Crown and Bank of England by the Rothschilds, for the 1st time, the Cestui Que Vie Trusts of the United Kingdom became assets placed in private banks effectively becoming "private trusts" or "Fide Commissary Trusts" administered by commissioners (guardians). From 1835 and the Wills Act, these private trusts have been also considered "Secret Trusts" whose existence does not need to be divulged.
Canon 2046
From 1917/18 with the enactment of the Sedition Act and the Trading with the Enemy Act in the United States and through the United Kingdom, the citizens of the Commonwealth and the United States became effectively "enemies of the state" and "aliens" which in turn converted the "Fide Commissary" private secret trusts to "Foreign Situs" (Private International) Trusts.
Canon 2047
In 1931, the Roman Cult, also known as the Vatican created the Bank for International Settlements for the control of claimed property of associated private central banks around the world. Upon the deliberate bankruptcy of most countries, private central banks were installed as administrators and the global Cestui Que Vie/Foreign Situs Trust system was implemented from 1933 onwards.
Canon 2048
Since 1933, when a child is borne in a State (Estate) under inferior Roman law, three (3) Cestui Que (Vie) Trusts are created upon certain presumptions, specifically designed to deny the child forever any rights of Real Property, any Rights as a Free Person and any Rights to be known as man and woman rather than a creature or animal, by claiming and possessing their Soul or Spirit.
Canon 2049
Since 1933, upon a new child being borne, the Executors or Administrators of the higher Estate willingly and knowingly convey the beneficial entitlements of the child as Beneficiary into the 1st Cestui Que (Vie) Trust in the form of a Registry Number by registering the Name, thereby also creating the Corporate Person and denying the child any rights as an owner of Real Property.
Canon 2050
Since 1933, when a child is borne, the Executors or Administrators of the higher Estate knowingly and willingly claim the baby as chattel to the Estate. The slave baby contract is then created by honoring the ancient tradition of either having the ink impression of the feet of the baby onto the live birth record, or a drop of its blood as well as tricking the parents to signing the baby away through the deceitful legal meanings on the live birth record. This live birth record as a promissory note is converted into a slave bond sold to the private reserve bank of the estate and then conveyed into a 2nd and separate Cestui Que (Vie) Trust per child owned by the bank. Upon the promissory note reaching maturity and the bank being unable to “seize” the slave child, a maritime lien is lawfully issued to “salvage” the lost property and itself monetized as currency issued in series against the Cestui Que (Vie) Trust.
Canon 2051
Each Cestui Que Vie Trust created since 1933 represents one of the 3 Crowns representing the 3 claims of property of the Roman Cult, being Real Property, Personal Property and Ecclesiastical Property and the denial of any rights to men and women, other than those chosen as loyal members of the society and as Executors and Administrators.
Canon 2052
The Three (3) Cestui Que Vie Trusts are the specific denial of rights of Real Property, Personal Property and Ecclesiastical Property for most men and women, corresponds exactly to the three forms of law available to the Galla of the Bar Association Courts. The first form of law is corporate commercial law is effective because of the 1st Cestui Que Vie Trust. The second form of law is maritime and trust law is effective because of the 2nd Cestui Que Vie Trust. The 3rd form of law is Talmudic and Roman Cult law is effective because of the 3rd Cestui Que Vie Trust of Baptism.
Canon 2053
The Birth Certificate issued under Roman Law represents the modern equivalent to the Settlement Certificates of the 17th century and signifies the holder as a pauper and effectively a Roman Slave. The Birth Certificate has no direct relationship to the private secret trusts controlled by the private banking network, nor can it be used to force the administration of a state or nation to divulge the existence of these secret trusts.
Canon 2054
As the Cestui Que Vie Trusts are created as private secret trusts on multiple presumptions including the ongoing bankruptcy of certain national estates, they remain the claimed private property of the Roman Cult banks and therefore cannot be directly claimed or used.
Canon 2055
While the private secret trusts of the private central banks cannot be directly addressed, they are still formed on certain presumptions of law including claimed ownership of the name, the body, the mind and soul of infants, men and women. Each and every man and woman has the absolute right to rebuke and reject such false presumptions as a member of One Heaven and holder of their own title.
Canon 2056
Given the private secret trusts of the private central banks are created on false presumptions, when a man or woman makes clear their Live Borne Record and claim over their own name, body, mind and soul, any such trust based on such false presumptions ceases to have any property.
Canon 2057
Any Administrator or Executor that refuses to immediately dissolve a Cestui Que (Vie) Trust, upon a Person establishing their status and competency, is guilty of fraud and fundamental breach of their fiduciary duties requiring their immediate removal and punishment.