Dispute Resolution and the Doctrine of 3 notices

Current Status
Not Enrolled
Get Started

Life should be very simply, and when knowledge is hidden then it merely creates fear, dependency and monopolies where privileged individuals can life off the energy of those who are kept in the dark by not having access to the knowledge.

The rule of law is simple…

All are equal under the law, and no one is above the law = Equity act in person and will not suffer a wrong without a remedy!

Everything is merely about claims, and as we are innocent until proven guilty, the claimant must prove their claim on the balance of probabilities (51%) for civil matters (95% for scientific matters, as below that it is not considered science!), and where harm is done beyond any reasonable doubt (and if based on science 99%).

If at the time you cannot show your actions are lawful, then you are breaching another’s peace (individually), or the people’s peace (collectively).

By asking another to prove their claim that they have a lawful right, and that you are under a lawful obligation, you are not creating controversy (acting with honour, good faith and clean hands).

This module shows you how to civilly settle disputes by understanding people’s normal behaviour, and if they continue to breach the peace how you can create a record that you can take for public dispute resolution (courts).

This is how the monarch’s first promise works – we, the people create our respective laws in the courts, so each of us holds the power to change society for the benefit of all.

Time to change our customs – no more empty promises from politicians, no more lying politicians, no more abusing those with less knowledge and turning a blind eye


DISPUTE SETTLEMENT,pdf version 20210904

15 thoughts on “Dispute Resolution and the Doctrine of 3 notices”

  1. Hi Marc,
    Just to clarify, the 250 pounds per hour charged is only for new disputes that are not in the Cease and Desist Notice I am issuing?

    The court will decide the penalty if they cannot provide evidence to their claims, is that correct?

    • The logic is the respondent must answer the points of dispute.
      By not answering or obfuscation where the claim something they have no right to claim, or are creating a dispute where none exists, you will charge for that time only resulting from them breaching your peace!

      Equally they could is you are doing the same so always act in honour, good faith and with clean hands.

      • Thank you for the response Marc.
        Sorry still need more clarity, it is for every hour from when they breach my peace until such time as the claim is settled, which will probably be in court? Is that correct? I mean it could potentially be months.

          • Wouldn’t we all….
            Human nature is to do as little as possible for as much as possible…
            So we need to draw the line in the sand (hence according to lawful governance ‘according to our respective laws and customs’, we are simply changing our custom and no longer tolerating them behaving as they do so we need to move them to do what they are meant to do and hence holding them to account!

        • According to the civil procedure rules there are only 3 options to respond to each point:
          Admit the point, or
          Deny the point providing counter argument, or
          Ask for further supporting evidence…

          If they do not do that then they are breaching your peace (creating the common law tort of trespass), so you can charge at what ever rate you want as no one can tell you what your time is worth!

          You give them the time frame within which to respond.
          At any point when they do not respond honourably, in good faith and with clean hands as defined in the civil procedure rules, then you can charge… so you are setting up your litigant in person rate should it need to go to court…

          They have the choice and you are letting them know in advance what your fees will be to breach your peace!

  2. Hi Mark.
    I undertook the training with you this weekend at Rossendale, I was the guy wearing the hat!
    could you direct me to a downloadable version of the notices, please?
    I don’t seem to have come across them in this training block.
    Alan McDonald

    • In 2008 Ineos wanted a way to serve the anti fracking protesters for their injunction and came to an arrangement with the Master Marsh to do so by email using a witness email account as the protesters did not have fixed addresses to allow them to be served… so now we can use that precedence to serve by email – kharma…

  3. Mark this is outstanding piece of work in other words a Master piece, awesome stuff I can’t wait to try my new printer out to serve the military GP staff to 2 too this date they are over obsessed on wearing masks and we are in April 2022.
    I want changing “notice for the agent is notice with the principal & vice versa

    • Never come across that wording before – so long as you explain what you mean (substance) the exact wording does not matter (form) as equity is about substance and not form!

Leave a comment