What It Means to Demand a Court de Jure in Your Notices - Article 39
Magna Carta 1215
In a time when corporations, government agencies, and private debt collectors routinely threaten the people with fines, warrants, and so-called “legal action,” it is more important than ever to understand your inherent rights under common law and constitutional authority.
One of the most powerful declarations we can make in any notice, affidavit, or defence — is this: “I demand due process under Article 39 of Magna Carta 1215, before a properly convened court de jure, with a jury of my sovereign peers.”
But what does that actually mean? Let’s break it down.
What is a Court De Jure?
A court de jure (Latin for “of law”) is a lawful court established under common law — not a corporate court created by statute or governed by government rules.
To be a true court de jure, it must:
1)Be independent of the state, Crown, or any private corporation
2)Be convened under constitutional authority (such as Magna Carta 1215) Operate on the basis of natural law and due process.
3) Be presided over by a jury of the people, not a judge acting alone.
4)Honour the principle that no man or woman is above the law — or beneath it.
A ‘Court De Jure’ recognises only real harm, loss, or fraud — not commercial contracts, fictional “obligations,” or statutory offences applied without consent.
What Is Due Process Under Article 39?
‘Article 39’ of Magna Carta 1215 states: “No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.”
This is the basis for what we now call due process. It means:
You can not be judged, punished, fined, or trespassed upon without due process of law.
You have the right to a trial by a jury of your equals.
No judgment is valid unless it is made by the people — not a government officer, clerk, or magistrate.
Modern courts rarely meet this standard. Instead, most “hearings” take place in administrative courts, which are:
Corporate in nature Governed by statute, not common law Staffed by judges or clerks who are paid by the state Designed to enforce policy — not uphold liberty. That’s why we do not accept corporate hearings, summary judgments, or any process that by-passes ‘Article 39’.
Who Are Your Sovereign Peers?
When we say "jury of my sovereign peers," we mean: Living men and women who, like you, are not in contract with the Crown or corporate government. People who stand equal before the Creator and the law, not agents of any statutory system Individuals with natural conscience, free will, and lawful understanding.
They are not magistrates, state employees, or corporate enforcers.
Only your peers — free and equal — can lawfully judge your actions, your claims, or your defence.
Why Demand a ‘Court De Jure’ in Your Notice?
When you include this demand in your notice: You deny consent to any corporate or statutory jurisdiction.
You invoke the Constitution and stand in lawful rebellion under ‘Article 61’ if treason or breach has occurred
You place the burden of proof back on the accuser — where it lawfully belongs.
You make it clear that no action against you is lawful unless a true ‘Court De Jure’ is convened.
It is your right to insist on a real hearing of the matter — not a rubber-stamp process.
And any attempt to move forward outside of a ‘Court De Jure’, with full due process and judgment by jury, is a breach of constitutional law and — where rebellion has been lawfully invoked — a treasonous act.
Conclusion: Why This Matters Now..!
When you assert your right to a ‘Court De Jure’, you are not being difficult — you are standing on one of the most fundamental principles of lawful society:
That no man, woman, or institution has the right to judge or punish you without a proper, lawful, independent hearing before your equals.
This is not a request. It is a demand — made in honour, in truth, and under constitutional authority.
Know your rights!
Magna Carta 1215
In a time when corporations, government agencies, and private debt collectors routinely threaten the people with fines, warrants, and so-called “legal action,” it is more important than ever to understand your inherent rights under common law and constitutional authority.
One of the most powerful declarations we can make in any notice, affidavit, or defence — is this: “I demand due process under Article 39 of Magna Carta 1215, before a properly convened court de jure, with a jury of my sovereign peers.”
But what does that actually mean? Let’s break it down.
What is a Court De Jure?
A court de jure (Latin for “of law”) is a lawful court established under common law — not a corporate court created by statute or governed by government rules.
To be a true court de jure, it must:
1)Be independent of the state, Crown, or any private corporation
2)Be convened under constitutional authority (such as Magna Carta 1215) Operate on the basis of natural law and due process.
3) Be presided over by a jury of the people, not a judge acting alone.
4)Honour the principle that no man or woman is above the law — or beneath it.
A ‘Court De Jure’ recognises only real harm, loss, or fraud — not commercial contracts, fictional “obligations,” or statutory offences applied without consent.
What Is Due Process Under Article 39?
‘Article 39’ of Magna Carta 1215 states: “No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.”
This is the basis for what we now call due process. It means:
You can not be judged, punished, fined, or trespassed upon without due process of law.
You have the right to a trial by a jury of your equals.
No judgment is valid unless it is made by the people — not a government officer, clerk, or magistrate.
Modern courts rarely meet this standard. Instead, most “hearings” take place in administrative courts, which are:
Corporate in nature Governed by statute, not common law Staffed by judges or clerks who are paid by the state Designed to enforce policy — not uphold liberty. That’s why we do not accept corporate hearings, summary judgments, or any process that by-passes ‘Article 39’.
Who Are Your Sovereign Peers?
When we say "jury of my sovereign peers," we mean: Living men and women who, like you, are not in contract with the Crown or corporate government. People who stand equal before the Creator and the law, not agents of any statutory system Individuals with natural conscience, free will, and lawful understanding.
They are not magistrates, state employees, or corporate enforcers.
Only your peers — free and equal — can lawfully judge your actions, your claims, or your defence.
Why Demand a ‘Court De Jure’ in Your Notice?
When you include this demand in your notice: You deny consent to any corporate or statutory jurisdiction.
You invoke the Constitution and stand in lawful rebellion under ‘Article 61’ if treason or breach has occurred
You place the burden of proof back on the accuser — where it lawfully belongs.
You make it clear that no action against you is lawful unless a true ‘Court De Jure’ is convened.
It is your right to insist on a real hearing of the matter — not a rubber-stamp process.
And any attempt to move forward outside of a ‘Court De Jure’, with full due process and judgment by jury, is a breach of constitutional law and — where rebellion has been lawfully invoked — a treasonous act.
Conclusion: Why This Matters Now..!
When you assert your right to a ‘Court De Jure’, you are not being difficult — you are standing on one of the most fundamental principles of lawful society:
That no man, woman, or institution has the right to judge or punish you without a proper, lawful, independent hearing before your equals.
This is not a request. It is a demand — made in honour, in truth, and under constitutional authority.
Know your rights!
‘Notices and How To Use Them’
It is important to use notices accurately. A notice 'gives notice' of an occurrence or condition, which is subsequently documented as proof (when sent by recorded delivery, then verified on 'track and trace' to assure arrival, and the delivery information is then documented).
A Notice received in law is presumed acknowledged, and if not responded to, it is deemed consented to by ‘tacit agreement’.
Maintaining the integrity of your notifications and affidavits is crucial.
There is a general rule that you must offer sufficient notice of your intent within your notices, i.e. provide, say, 28 days to respond, or 30 days for any financial claims where it is reasonable to do so, and just 7 days if time is short (for example, a pending summons).
Then, if your notification is dismissed or greeted with a lack of ‘substance,' give a chance to cure (make amends) meaning that the reply ignored, the lawful points made within the document.
Any rebuttal provided without evidence on paper to prove the rebuttal is without substance, solidity, or merit.
Here's an example of how notices could be given, for example, to “Fake Courts"…
‘Notice of Understanding and Intent' (if nothing is pending, you can offer your ‘lawful understanding’ with the ‘intent to educate’ the man or woman served with it),...
#1 'Notice of Conditional Acceptance': which is a 'Notice of clarification request' (similar to the ‘Notice of Default and Opportunity to Cure’, but by simply asking for clarification if no reply, or to clarify any points made)...
#2 'Notice of Default and Chance to Cure': We are not looking for closure; the case is open because we are seeking restitution for their harassment and demands, so try flipping the script on them. If the requesting parties have not settled the dispute, more notices are issued: 'Notice of Treason Misprision'; 'Notice of Coercion to Aid and Abet High Treason'; 'Notice to Stop'; ‘Notice of Non-Jurisdiction’; ‘Notice of Lawful Obligation’; ‘Notice of Wilful Ignorance’; ‘Notice of No Confidence’... and or anything else you’d like to create honestly.
‘Affidavits of Truth’
Affidavits of truth are frequently sworn under penalty of perjury (by the Affiant) and are extraordinarily powerful procedural instruments under common law.
An Affidavit is frequently composed of a sworn declaration of truth with numbered points of evidenced facts 1) 2) 3) 4) and so on, inside that sworn declaration that must be rebutted, point for point, or, the ‘Affidavit’ will become YOUR Truth in Law.
“Everything stated must be completely evidential”..!
An ‘Affidavit’ can only be rebutted by another ‘Affidavit’ under the same terms and conditions (under the penalty of perjury) that addresses each and every numbered point by point...
Every point must be responded to by the challenging ‘Affiant’ and
proven to be ‘false in substance’....and ALL must be sworn under penalty of perjury.
Denying all other alleged 'jurisdictions' other than a properly convened common law court of public record, or a 'Court De Jure' and in open forum (so that justice can be seen to be done), is critical when it comes to receiving summonses (invitations) to their so-called "courts of law," which are not courts of law but 'Cestui Que Vie' TRUST hearings, conducted under ‘treasonous and fraudulent rules' not laws…
Accepting the arbitral SERVICE of the corrupt criminal "courts" that have formed inside the Isles of Great Britain and the Commonwealth, particularly after the Treasonous Government of Edward Heath shoehorned us into the EEC, and much earlier in these days of institutionalised treason, is a criminal act.
These so-called courts are using treasonous laws to enrich themselves with the money of the uninformed/ignorant public, who generally believe that the 'legal' system is lawful when it plainly is not, and that they are obedient to it, which no one can be.
It is important to use notices accurately. A notice 'gives notice' of an occurrence or condition, which is subsequently documented as proof (when sent by recorded delivery, then verified on 'track and trace' to assure arrival, and the delivery information is then documented).
A Notice received in law is presumed acknowledged, and if not responded to, it is deemed consented to by ‘tacit agreement’.
Maintaining the integrity of your notifications and affidavits is crucial.
There is a general rule that you must offer sufficient notice of your intent within your notices, i.e. provide, say, 28 days to respond, or 30 days for any financial claims where it is reasonable to do so, and just 7 days if time is short (for example, a pending summons).
Then, if your notification is dismissed or greeted with a lack of ‘substance,' give a chance to cure (make amends) meaning that the reply ignored, the lawful points made within the document.
Any rebuttal provided without evidence on paper to prove the rebuttal is without substance, solidity, or merit.
Here's an example of how notices could be given, for example, to “Fake Courts"…
‘Notice of Understanding and Intent' (if nothing is pending, you can offer your ‘lawful understanding’ with the ‘intent to educate’ the man or woman served with it),...
#1 'Notice of Conditional Acceptance': which is a 'Notice of clarification request' (similar to the ‘Notice of Default and Opportunity to Cure’, but by simply asking for clarification if no reply, or to clarify any points made)...
#2 'Notice of Default and Chance to Cure': We are not looking for closure; the case is open because we are seeking restitution for their harassment and demands, so try flipping the script on them. If the requesting parties have not settled the dispute, more notices are issued: 'Notice of Treason Misprision'; 'Notice of Coercion to Aid and Abet High Treason'; 'Notice to Stop'; ‘Notice of Non-Jurisdiction’; ‘Notice of Lawful Obligation’; ‘Notice of Wilful Ignorance’; ‘Notice of No Confidence’... and or anything else you’d like to create honestly.
‘Affidavits of Truth’
Affidavits of truth are frequently sworn under penalty of perjury (by the Affiant) and are extraordinarily powerful procedural instruments under common law.
An Affidavit is frequently composed of a sworn declaration of truth with numbered points of evidenced facts 1) 2) 3) 4) and so on, inside that sworn declaration that must be rebutted, point for point, or, the ‘Affidavit’ will become YOUR Truth in Law.
“Everything stated must be completely evidential”..!
An ‘Affidavit’ can only be rebutted by another ‘Affidavit’ under the same terms and conditions (under the penalty of perjury) that addresses each and every numbered point by point...
Every point must be responded to by the challenging ‘Affiant’ and
proven to be ‘false in substance’....and ALL must be sworn under penalty of perjury.
Denying all other alleged 'jurisdictions' other than a properly convened common law court of public record, or a 'Court De Jure' and in open forum (so that justice can be seen to be done), is critical when it comes to receiving summonses (invitations) to their so-called "courts of law," which are not courts of law but 'Cestui Que Vie' TRUST hearings, conducted under ‘treasonous and fraudulent rules' not laws…
Accepting the arbitral SERVICE of the corrupt criminal "courts" that have formed inside the Isles of Great Britain and the Commonwealth, particularly after the Treasonous Government of Edward Heath shoehorned us into the EEC, and much earlier in these days of institutionalised treason, is a criminal act.
These so-called courts are using treasonous laws to enrich themselves with the money of the uninformed/ignorant public, who generally believe that the 'legal' system is lawful when it plainly is not, and that they are obedient to it, which no one can be.
When the truth is that you have no obligation to ‘Her Majesty's Court & Tribunal Service’ unless you have agreed to it, and doing so (because they are not courts of law but unauthorised, corporate, treasonous businesses) would constitute aiding and abetting treason and would put you in violation of the ‘Oath of Allegiance’ to the Constitution through the barons.
You can defend yourself in their phoney "courts," but you CANNOT consent to their service (illegal business) without breaching the law; you can only refuse them jurisdiction when attending them in order to irritate them.
The ‘Crown’ was seized in 1688 and has been lawfully deposed by law (by the ‘Barons Committee’ in 2001) for violating the ‘Coronation Oath’ and ‘Magna Carta 1215’...
Only a ‘Constitutional Monarch’ has the power to create courts of law. There ARE NO courts of law in the whole of the Commonwealth, and there haven't been for a very long time.
To summarise, we are under the rule of an unlawful (il)legal system that we must reject in its entirety under the law, especially because our nation is in legitimate resistance and its claimed "public officials" are committing the most heinous crimes (treason, terrorism, war crimes etc).
We may utilise lawful ‘Notices’ to reject this criminal system while preserving all of our entitlements, which are just 'benefits' of the welfare state... remember you are sovereign, this is meant to be a sovereign nation.
We all have National Sovereignty inside a Common Law Jurisdiction, otherwise Treason MUST have been committed.
When a sufficient number of people exercise their sovereign rights and customs in this manner, and demand hearings under common law ONLY, a Jury (who are the judges) will eventually hear the evidence of the crimes committed by the government and others, and those criminals in public service will be arrested for their involvement.
Treason from inside can only be fought by the people; a committed minority is all that is necessary.
Original Article by: David Robinson (paraphrased).
🧠 Final Thought
Lawful process is built on clarity and record-keeping.
Notices exist so FACTS cannot later be denied or forgotten.
You can defend yourself in their phoney "courts," but you CANNOT consent to their service (illegal business) without breaching the law; you can only refuse them jurisdiction when attending them in order to irritate them.
The ‘Crown’ was seized in 1688 and has been lawfully deposed by law (by the ‘Barons Committee’ in 2001) for violating the ‘Coronation Oath’ and ‘Magna Carta 1215’...
Only a ‘Constitutional Monarch’ has the power to create courts of law. There ARE NO courts of law in the whole of the Commonwealth, and there haven't been for a very long time.
To summarise, we are under the rule of an unlawful (il)legal system that we must reject in its entirety under the law, especially because our nation is in legitimate resistance and its claimed "public officials" are committing the most heinous crimes (treason, terrorism, war crimes etc).
We may utilise lawful ‘Notices’ to reject this criminal system while preserving all of our entitlements, which are just 'benefits' of the welfare state... remember you are sovereign, this is meant to be a sovereign nation.
We all have National Sovereignty inside a Common Law Jurisdiction, otherwise Treason MUST have been committed.
When a sufficient number of people exercise their sovereign rights and customs in this manner, and demand hearings under common law ONLY, a Jury (who are the judges) will eventually hear the evidence of the crimes committed by the government and others, and those criminals in public service will be arrested for their involvement.
Treason from inside can only be fought by the people; a committed minority is all that is necessary.
Original Article by: David Robinson (paraphrased).
🧠 Final Thought
Lawful process is built on clarity and record-keeping.
Notices exist so FACTS cannot later be denied or forgotten.
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
How to establish ‘COMMON LAW COURT’ when in ‘Admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction’.
“I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract or commercial agreement. That I did not enter into knowingly, voluntarily or intentionally. And furthermore, I do not accept any liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract and or commercial agreement.”
‘Under UCC 1207’
“I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract or commercial agreement. That I did not enter into knowingly, voluntarily or intentionally. And furthermore, I do not accept any liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract and or commercial agreement.”
‘Under UCC 1207’
👏6🔥3👍2
Council Tax Enforcement Case Law.
https://awakenedgb.wordpress.com/2026/01/02/council-tax-enforcement-case-law/
https://awakenedgb.wordpress.com/2026/01/02/council-tax-enforcement-case-law/
Awakened England
Council Tax Enforcement – Case Law
Council tax enforcement is only lawful if the council acts strictly within the powers Parliament gave it. Every case of overreach below reinforces limits on what councils may or may not do. 1️⃣ Att…
🔥6
‘Cestui Que Trust’
Cestui Que Trust (pronounced “ses tu kay trust”) is a Law French term meaning “he who trusts” or “the one for whose benefit the trust is created”. It is the traditional legal terminology for a Beneficiary—the man or woman who holds the Equitable Interest in property held on trust and for whose benefit the Trust exists.
The term originates from the Norman French legal language that permeated English law following the Norman Conquest of 1066 and remained in use in the courts for centuries. The full phrase is “Cestui que use” or “Cestui que trust”, referring to the man or woman who benefits from the use of property held by another.
In historical context, the Cestui Que Trust was the party whom Equity recognised as the true owner in conscience, even though Legal Title was held by another (the Trustee). The Courts of Chancery developed the law of trusts to protect the Cestui Que Trust from Trustees who might otherwise abuse their position as legal owners.
The Cestui Que Trust (beneficiary) has the right to:
∙ Benefit from and enjoy the Trust Property
∙ Receive distributions as determined by the Trust terms
∙ Have the Trust administered faithfully in their interest
∙ Enforce the Trustee’s fiduciary duties through the courts
∙ Be informed of matters materially affecting their interest
In a Trust’, the beneficiaries are the Cestui Que Trust, holding Equitable Interest in the Trust Property. Though the term Beneficiary is used throughout the Deed for clarity, Cestui Que Trust remains the precise traditional designation recognised in trust law and equity.
Cestui Que Trust (pronounced “ses tu kay trust”) is a Law French term meaning “he who trusts” or “the one for whose benefit the trust is created”. It is the traditional legal terminology for a Beneficiary—the man or woman who holds the Equitable Interest in property held on trust and for whose benefit the Trust exists.
The term originates from the Norman French legal language that permeated English law following the Norman Conquest of 1066 and remained in use in the courts for centuries. The full phrase is “Cestui que use” or “Cestui que trust”, referring to the man or woman who benefits from the use of property held by another.
In historical context, the Cestui Que Trust was the party whom Equity recognised as the true owner in conscience, even though Legal Title was held by another (the Trustee). The Courts of Chancery developed the law of trusts to protect the Cestui Que Trust from Trustees who might otherwise abuse their position as legal owners.
The Cestui Que Trust (beneficiary) has the right to:
∙ Benefit from and enjoy the Trust Property
∙ Receive distributions as determined by the Trust terms
∙ Have the Trust administered faithfully in their interest
∙ Enforce the Trustee’s fiduciary duties through the courts
∙ Be informed of matters materially affecting their interest
In a Trust’, the beneficiaries are the Cestui Que Trust, holding Equitable Interest in the Trust Property. Though the term Beneficiary is used throughout the Deed for clarity, Cestui Que Trust remains the precise traditional designation recognised in trust law and equity.
👍6🔥1
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
A little humour to brighten the Day…!
The Grace and Poise of this Super Hero is Remarkable…!
Yes Batman can Really Fly…!!!😆😂🤣
(Click on the Video to get the accompanying sounds effects)…
The Grace and Poise of this Super Hero is Remarkable…!
Yes Batman can Really Fly…!!!😆😂🤣
(Click on the Video to get the accompanying sounds effects)…
👏1
https://awakenedgb.wordpress.com/2025/03/16/sovereignty-posts-list
This blog covers a number of very helpful topics that many here will find of use and of Great value…!
This blog covers a number of very helpful topics that many here will find of use and of Great value…!
Awakened England
Resources Hub
Here is a categorized list of posts relating to sovereignty to make it easier to navigate this blog. We are an independent team publishing our research for free. The platform runs on voluntary dona…
👍2👏2🔥1
Summary of Ashby v White 1703.pdf
26.2 KB
In Summary of Ashby v White 1703
“By the common law of England, every commoner hath a right not to be subjected to laws, made without their consent; and because it cannot be given by every individual man in person, by reason of number and confusion, therefore that power is lodged in their representatives, elected by them for that purpose”… (excerpt read the full PDF).
“By the common law of England, every commoner hath a right not to be subjected to laws, made without their consent; and because it cannot be given by every individual man in person, by reason of number and confusion, therefore that power is lodged in their representatives, elected by them for that purpose”… (excerpt read the full PDF).
https://youtu.be/uYcHcZf_4xw?
This short video (12 mins) highlights the Elites Plans for Mankind….!!!
Please Share this video far and Wide and understand the Evil that we as Mankind are facing and that we must remove it from the face of the earth, if we the people are ever to know True Peace..!
This short video (12 mins) highlights the Elites Plans for Mankind….!!!
Please Share this video far and Wide and understand the Evil that we as Mankind are facing and that we must remove it from the face of the earth, if we the people are ever to know True Peace..!
YouTube
The Secret Covenant
info@trustassetprotectors.com
🔥3
👍3
‘Private Ordering’… the true language and terminology of common law emphasises the principles of natural justice, individual sovereignty… and it’s importance when writing Trust and Notice’s..!
Yusef El is one of the few individuals within the ‘Truth Movement’ who actively speaks and educates others on these fundamental concepts.
Unlike many so-called Gurus who often disseminate inaccurate or misleading information, his teachings are grounded in common sense and legal case law history.
Short 6 minute video offers eye-opening insights that can significantly shift your perspective for the better, fostering a deeper understanding of the true nature of law and personal freedom.
https://youtu.be/rJ3UeEzO8pU?
Yusef El is one of the few individuals within the ‘Truth Movement’ who actively speaks and educates others on these fundamental concepts.
Unlike many so-called Gurus who often disseminate inaccurate or misleading information, his teachings are grounded in common sense and legal case law history.
Short 6 minute video offers eye-opening insights that can significantly shift your perspective for the better, fostering a deeper understanding of the true nature of law and personal freedom.
https://youtu.be/rJ3UeEzO8pU?
YouTube
Private Ordering: The UCC Clause That Courts Cannot Override
What is Private Ordering, and why does it matter more than most people realize? In this video, we break down how private agreements, contracts, trusts, and arbitration operate outside public enforcement.
Most people believe courts have the final word on every…
Most people believe courts have the final word on every…
https://x.com/highfrequency19/status/2006457108708077757?
The Importance of Grammar in Law… and writing Trusts and Notices..!!!
Short video and very educational..! One NOT to be missed..!!!
The Importance of Grammar in Law… and writing Trusts and Notices..!!!
Short video and very educational..! One NOT to be missed..!!!
X (formerly Twitter)
Yusef El (@highfrequency19) on X
The importance of Grammar in Law.