The Common Law Right to Travel in detail

The Common Law Right to Travel in detail

Many people asked me NOT to write this, however I’ve come to the opinion that it’s time this issue was examined in detail and the case law you’ll need, should you get into trouble exercising your ‘Right To Travel’, more fully explained.

Some of this information is readily available elsewhere, but the court cases the information was lifted from is not there, as often this kind of information is pushed around the internet without any real examination of the facts. To that end I’ve taken it upon myself to elaborate further and show you where you can find a wealth (literally!) of legal information for FREE.

Many people will have seen various videos on YouTube and elsewhere, regarding this issue. But precious few will have explained to you where you can get the ‘legal’ information you might need, especially if you want to avoid some time courtesy of Her Majesty’s Bed and Breakfast establishment’s scattered around the country!

I was influenced a very long time ago, by stories then circulating amongst friends of mine in the USA, about Charlie Sprinkle. More on Charlie can be found on my blog HERE Charlie has, sadly, passed away since I wrote that piece and I now feel I owe him a debt of gratitude for reminding me that, it’s often humble people from ordinary backgrounds that can affect the greatest change. So this article is inspired by Charlie Sprinkle.

Now, although this is dedicated to that great Californian champion, this article is aimed squarely at those people residing in the UK. Although, you can cite case law in a defence (and academic opinion) from almost anywhere.

The sources used for this piece include:- (British and Irish Legal Information Institute, a reference for many solicitors and law professionals in the UK), look up case law from almost anywhere in the world. Open to use by members of the public FREE. (the Governments’ own web site covering legal the full content of ‘statutes’ and ‘Acts’), covers legislation for Scotland, England, Ireland and Wales. Also FREE to use and extremely useful. I use it almost daily.

Halsburys Laws of England is another essential component in our quest for TRUTH, curently edited by Baron Mackay of Clashfern a Scot.

I urge you always to do your own research and the best place to start is by searching the database of Halsbury’s Laws of England here

The House of Lords, the UK parliament web site and many other sources (including YouTube) are useful too and these formed part of my overall research.

I will give you the exact case law, which you can then verify for yourselves that what I’ve put here is truthful.

Charlie Sprinkle’s entire court action is also available on-line, should my American friends wish to step-by-step follow his example, which is truly remarkable. See my earlier piece on Charlie and watch some videos of Charlie describing the process he used  HERE

Firstly, the case law you need to to study (in date order), are these:-

R v Donovan [1934] 2 KB 498 at 507, [1934] All ER Rep 207 at 210. In delivering the judgement of the Court of Criminal Appeal Swift J, said:-

“If an act is unlawful in the sense of being in itself a criminal act, it is plain that it cannot be rendered lawful because the person to whose detriment it is done consents to it. No person can license another to commit a crime.”

Justice Swift is telling us that, driving without government documents such as licences, MOT’s etc., cannot be ‘of itself criminal’, as the government licences these acts and therefore they cannot be criminal.

This is still a leading case, as can be seen from this document which can be found on The House of Lords’ website:

Ex parte Lewis (1888) 21 Q.B.D. 191 Wills J. said in regard to public right of passage:-

“The only ‘dedication’ in the legal sense that we are aware of is that of a public right of passage, of which the legal description is a ‘right for all Her Majesty’s subjects at all seasons of the year freely and at their will to pass and re-pass without let or hindrance.’ ”


This makes the point that you can travel freely and that you can pass without ‘let’ (to hinder or stand in the way of)  or ‘hindrance’ (obstruction). The phrase ‘without let or hindrance’, meaning, without impediment, something that is free to progress.

Read the whole piece in the context of the case at the House of Lords:

It’s often interesting to look up some of the other case law cited in a judgement too.

DPP v. Jones and Another [1999] Lord Irvine LC

“The law should not make unlawful what is commonplace and well accepted.”

Lord Irvine makes the point that, one day you were a farmer with a shotgun, the next you’re a criminal because you don’t have a license for it. (a license has been required since 1962). See

See this UK Parliament (House of Lords) document here for a full transcript of the case:

Interestingly, this article coincided with the News that, Khat is to become illegal in this country too (at the time of writing), so those people who have it in their possession from next week will become criminals!

These cases help our understanding of and help to define the ‘common law right to travel’ argument in the legal realm.

So there you have it, I hope that helps many people, including the Police and other law professionals themselves, as I’m sure many of then would rather be chasing/prosecuting real criminals.

Another common concern amongst many of you seems to be whether Solicitors act for you or the Courts… well this should help focus that argument and dispel another myth or two.

In the famous case of Batchelor -v- Pattison & Mackersy (1876) 3R914 which establishes that solicitors are officers of the court and owe the court various duties which can transcend duties owed to a client but generally when a counsel is employed the solicitor is bound to follow his instructions. In England the Rondel -v- Worley 1969 AC191 case established that solicitors “should not blindly follow counsel”.

This obviously has implications for questions of negligence when they arise in the context of the conduct of hearings. In the above case the client decided to sue his former solicitor in relation to his conduct of the trial claiming that his solicitor had been negligent. He advanced a human rights argument that he had been denied a fair trial because of negligence and claimed a miscarriage of justice had resulted. He did not aver that he would have been acquitted but for this negligence.

So there you have it, two myths dispelled for the price of one!

Many books on aspects of Law cost well over a £1,000 including Greens Litigation Styles and indeed ‘Halsbury’s Laws of England’ which costs a not inconsiderable sum of £10,100 for the latest 5th edition (at time of writing), yes, you read that correctly! See HERE. Yet we’re told that ignorance of the law is NO DEFENCE! How can we possibly understand the law when it’s prohibitively expensive to buy such books and they’re not available in my (or your), local library for the same reason? Of course this is a deliberate attempt to keep you in that state of ‘ignorance’, so that administrative courts can unlawfully steal your debt money.

By the way Lord Halsbury was a very interesting man and I’ll finish by quoting a piece from that excellent (though expensive!) work that bears his name:-

 “It is a constitutional principle that the assent of the Queen & Parliament is prerequisite to the establishment of a Court which can operate a system of administrative law in Her Majesty’s Courts in England. This was confirmed by Lord Denning during the debates on the European Communities Amendment Bill, HL Deb 08 October 1986 vol 480 cc246-95 246 at 250: “There is our judicial system deriving from the Crown as the source and fountain of justice. No court can be set up in England, no court can exist in England, except by the authority of the Queen and Parliament. That has been so ever since the Bill of Rights.”


So, even if you do get dragged to court over ‘alleged’  council tax, parking fines etc., you now know that administrative courts are unconstitutional and have no constitutional authority derived from parliament. They’re businesses, pure and simple. Don’t play their game.

I will be writing more on the contents of ‘Halsbury’s Laws of England’ soon, especially an in depth look at why there is NO authority for administrative courts in this country and no Act can be passed to legitimise them because of the constitutional restraints placed upon her Majesty at Her coronation (touched on in the above quote). Which means they can’t pursue you for Council Tax etc. I’ve stated many times, all taxes are voluntary! More on that coming soon, so look back.

In closing this article, you might want an understanding of the rules of OSCOLA (a guide to understanding and presenting/citing case law etc), by downloading the pdf quick guide HERE or a more in depth guide HERE

My end quote for this article is by LORD HALSBURY, HARDINGE STANLEY GIFFARD British statesman (1823 – 1921)

“My Lords, I have more than once had occasion to say that in construing a statute I believe the worst person to construe it is the person who is responsible for its draft.”
– 1902 Appeal Cases (p. 477)


This site is maintained by James-Neely: Gillan™ and his Sponsors.

You should be aware that the information on this website cannot be a substitute for legal advice – knowledge and understanding of the relevant law is important so that appropriate steps can be taken to safeguard the adult in any particular case.

By using this website you agree to be legally bound by the terms and conditions set out below. If you do not want to be bound by these terms please discontinue the use of this site.

This site is produced by James-Neely:Gillan™ and whilst seeking to ensure that the information published on the site is up-to-date and accurate, the information on the site does not constitute legal or professional advice and James-Neely:Gillan™ and his Sponsors cannot accept any liability for actions arising from its use.

Copyright © 2011 – 2014 Free The People™
This web site is generously supported by The Digital Network with low cost PREMIUM web hosting and many other facilities that would cost us far too much elsewhere.

Update on Roger Hayes

Roger Hayes has now been released from prison and if there’s anybody out there with even the slightest interest in how our systems of Law are being manipulated and abused, then watch the video below now and complain to your MP about this issue.

Remember, this could be you or your Mother next!


ARREST OF ROGER HAYES – Latest Update – More as we get it

We have just learned that Wirral Council, having issued proceedings against Roger Hayes for non payment of Council Tax, recently decided to enact their right for a Committal Hearing against Roger for his continued non-payment.

On Tuesday 26 June 2012 a Committal Hearing took place at which Wirral Council state that Roger failed to appear.

As a result the Judge issued a bench warrant for his arrest, and Roger was arrested yesterday morning. The Council spokesman either did not know or refused to name the Judge.

Following his arrest Roger was brought before a Magistrate and sentenced to
21 days. The Council spokesman either did not know or refused to name the Magistrate, and was unable to say how much, if any, notice of either hearing was given to the General Public.

At this point we would like to make a correction to our initial press release, and that is:

Roger Hayes “WITHELD” his Council Tax rather than “refused to pay” as we reported. This has important implications in his legal case.

The most important fact in Roger’s arrest, trial and imprisonment is that nobody knows the detail of what happened to him. What were the names and numbers of the police officers? What was the Court? What was the number of the case? Who was the Magistrate or Judge? Were any public present to see justice being done?

Roger was arrested at home and 9 hours later he was in prison, on the decision of one Magistrate. This must be yet another very dangerous example of the rise of the ‘secret’ courts and ‘secret justice’ – Kenneth Clarke MP is still pushing for yet more Courts without Juries.

Calls to the police and Liverpool prison where he is being held, have all been met with a wall of silence under the ‘we can’t say’ and ‘data protection’. We can see from this how yet more secrecy is introduced to keep the public interest at bay.

It is understood that the police have received many calls – one member of the public had the phone slammed down on him when he mentioned Roger’s name.

Roger’s family have also been refused direct information and access to him.
They have now started the paperwork trail for formal permission to visit.

A former police officer has kindly made a number of pertinent points which we are happy to publish.

He was informed us that the prison would not confirm that Roger was with them for “security reasons”. They referred him to the “Prisoner Location Service”
on 0121 626 2773 – they would not accept verbal requests. Merseyside Police switchboard are also referring calls about Roger to the Council. This appears a highly dubious practice at law.

He states – “Because I wanted to make complaints I was put through to the police control room. The drill is for complaints to be recorded and then passed to an Inspector who will contact the complainant within 24 hours. My initial complaints are:

1. Was anyone informed of Rogers arrest? The contingency plan was for him to get a message to me. Note that the prisoner does not get to make a phone call himself. This is a precaution against prisoners passing coded messages to their associates outside.

2. Merseyside police, according to various sources on the Internet, are claiming that “Data Protection” forbids them to confirm Rogers whereabouts.
This appears highly dubious practice because a “Regulation” cannot be held to repeal or infringe a Common Law right.

3. Passing complaints about police actions to the Council is a breach of the Police Discipline Regulations and of confidentiality for the individuals who are being complained about. I believe the Police Federation will not like this abuse of process.”

The UK Column is delighted to report that the story of Roger Hayes has gone UK and world wide. Many are asking us what can they do? Our first answer is to spread the word, highlighting the the seriousness of the secrecy and lack of transparency in the whole process. As an example another member of the public has asked these excellent questions:

“Was there a signed warrant (wet signature) and who authorised it if so:

– Was there any forced entry to the house and/or damage.

– Did the warrant remain at the house.

– Did they search the house. Did they take anything away, i.e. computer, files, phones, router etc.

– Did they leave an inventory at the house Were there any witnesses to the arrest.

– Was any force used on Roger, or anyone else in the house.

– Was he handcuffed. Was there any explanation to anyone else in the house.
Is there any idea of the charge. Were the arresting officers ‘sworn police officers,

– PCSO’s, from another ‘agency’ with powers of arrest or privates, or a mixture.

– Did anyone get their names or collar numbers.

– Did anyone get the name of the Prison Officer who called. If anyone could collate that, am sure his lawyers (or others) will want it, plus, it would provide good info for a follow up article”

Please ring the authorities yourself to hear their answers first hand. Every call is a point of support for Roger and shows the authorities the overwhelming public interest in the case. Please also write and ask for information and answers from Wirral Council and other authorities. As always be polite and measured in your calls and requests for information – unfortunately the authorities may not treat you with the same respect. As soon as we have more information we will post it. For those that want to write to Roger we will post his Prison Number as soon as we have it.

Merseyside Police Tel: 101 local or +44 (0)151 709 6010 in UK.

Liverpool Prison Tel: +44 (0)151 530 4000

Crimestoppers (UK only) Tel: 0800 555 111

If you would like to write to Roger with your support, you can write to him

HMP Liverpool, 68 Hornby Road Liverpool L9 3DF

His prisoner number is: A8953CP

There’s a special UK Column Live broadcast tomorrow, Wednesday, 4th July at 12PM BST:

Audio stream on TNS Radio Video stream on UK Column

“I am only one; but still I am one. I cannot do everything, but I still can do something. I will not refuse to do the something I can do.” – Helen Keller



Getting a copy of a Court Minute or judgement against yourself – How hard can it be? Part 1

Having allowed a situation to develop between myself and FALKIRK COUNCIL, and where I deliberately chose a solicitor to defend me in an action later taken against me by FALKIRK COUNCIL, I am now in a position where I should be able to obtain a copy of the Court Minute and the Judgement that was made against me at FALKIRK SHERIFF COURT- easy eh?

To give you a little background, this was part of a continued long term attack on me by FALKIRK COUNCIL and the DWP (over several years), that was based on a personal vendetta by the top officials within FALKIRK COUNCIL (a company trading at a profit), against a much smaller company (mine), which revolved around a claim I made for benefit when forced to sell the business. This eventually resulted in a decision at court where FALKIRK COUNCILS’ case was found ‘Not Proven’ and the DWP’s witness was found to lack ‘Credibility’ however, I was found guilty on a ‘Technicality’ that resulted in a ‘FINE’ being imposed (surprise, surprise), the technicality was apparently a form I had completed in their office that had my ‘signature’. The fact that no one could attest to the interview ever having taken place, that they didn’t know who signed the form on their behalf and the fact that I wasn’t even there on the date in question, made no difference to this ‘technicality’.

However, now that there is a judgement against my LEGAL FICTION, I thought I would now have the Sheriff arrested for Deception and Fraud, and so in order to prove my allegation, I would merely obtain a copy of the minute (the formal record of procedure), to use with the vast amount of other paperwork I have, and thus prove the deception.

So, off to court I went yesterday, happy in the knowledge that I could start something that would maybe raise a few eyebrows here and around the World. Imagine my surprise then when I was told by the Clerk that, I couldn’t get a copy of the requested minute!

I asked the Clerk to consult with a senior manager, as I would seek this under the Freedom of Information Act if required. I was categorically told that not only could I not get this under the FOI Act, but that I would not get it under any circumstances.

Undeterred, I then went to the Procurator Fiscal’s office nearby and asked if this could possibly be the case, to be informed that they …’were not prepared to comment on that matter’. Now, I’m fully aware that there’s been others who’ve found themselves in this position, and like those others people, I too am more than a little tenacious so, off I went to the POLICE station opposite the court, to make a formal allegation about the Courts’ deception and fraud.

To cut a long story short, the Police Officers there were very polite, patient and indeed intrigued by the whole situation, although they also acknowledged that they didn’t understand the ‘Legal Person’ argument, even though I took the time to explain the CAPITALISATION of your NAME and the fact that all COMPANIES have their NAMES in CAPITALS – giving them my own company details as an example. I also informed them of the fact that, they could reliably check this information at Companies House and Dunn and Bradstreet themselves, in order to increase there own understanding with respect to my beliefs in these matters.

There also followed a short discussion on the meaning of *’understand’, where the Officers told me they did not know what the word meant! I then gave them a few practical examples of the definition, and circumstances where it might be used, which to be fair is not in their training (but it should be), I also told them that their command would certainly know the legal meaning of ‘understand’, but that it would be better if they knew it too.

However, It was agreed between the Police Officers and myself that the best course of action would be, to write to the court under the Freedom of Information Act anyway, and see what response (if any), I received. Then, with the evidence of the witnesses present during the trial, the documents I already have in my possession, take the appropriate action at that stage, as I would perhaps have a reply of some kind that should further strengthen my case.

So that’s what I will do and I shall update this post at a later date.

More information on this case is available on my main pages at including the fact that, the Sheriff often misdirected himself with regards to Benefit Law, and frankly if I had been defending myself I would have had him recused from the bench, as he clearly never understood the ‘Law’ he was meant to be making a decision on.

NB I used a very well known Glasgow Criminal Lawyer to defend me, and one who was well instructed by me on the Benefit Law governing my claim. He was also amazed by the fact that, he, himself could claim it, if he was ever in the same position.

It should be noted that I could have faced a jail sentence in this case, had I not taken the time to fully respond to all the allegations made against me over the years, and indeed on several occasions I pre-empted FALKIRK COUNCILS’ actions. The fact that, there’s a very long history of court action between FALKIRK COUNCIL and me, also helped my case. NEVER ignore any ‘offer’ but, respond to it positively by using the methods posted on my web site and elsewhere.

Also, seek legal advice should you find yourself in my situation, although remember your solicitor does not ‘act’ for you. Read much, and do not be afraid, look at what I’ve done and look at the actions of others. You will gain confidence over time, and if you’re interested in accompanying me, in order to learn, then please drop me an email, as I’m happy to let you observe me in action.

*’UNDERSTAND’ this simple word can have many meanings DEPENDING ON THE CONTEXT including ‘agreement’, ‘contract’, ‘accord’ see more here .

Common Law – does it exist? article 1

Common Law – article 1

This Blog expresses my (James-Neely: Gillan), sole opinions on aspects of Common Law, and also how they relate specifically to English Language countries like the UK, USA and Canada etc., with a slight nod to Scotland – where this Author resides. This Common Law Justice Imageblog site then should be seen, as my personal ‘truth’, however, if I can help anyone even begin to understand the universal truth that, we (the people of the world), are being deceived on a massive scale. More on this can be found on my quotations page on my main web site here  where comment from some of the most influential men in history, and their views on this deception, can also be found.

Many people keep asking me does ‘Common Law’ really exist? Well, yes, of course it exists (as well as many other branches of law), and indeed it’s used every day, here in this country and elsewhere. The question is not so much does it exist, but rather when is it applicable? For many people assume (and indeed you’re led to believe), that, there is only one lawful jurisdiction that you’re standing under at all times, and that’s ‘CIVIL LAW’. This is however, not the case, as you will find out when you start to research this issue more for yourselves.

Common Law has existed for centuries, it’s essentially judge made law (precedent), and if you should ever get into trouble with the police, perhaps injuring someone in Self Defence say – then in this example, you would be charged with committing a ‘Common Law’ offence.

Most people visiting this site though, are more likely to be interested in the many methods of applying Common Law to everyday problems. So what can we do to apply our real laws to everyday situations? Well, in order to answer that question, we need to understand the differences between Rights and Privileges. A right is defined as inherent, irrevocable, an entitlement held by all citizens. A privilege is conditional and can be revoked, and Rights which are also ‘unalienable’ or’ inalienable’.

The whole concept came from the Stoic School of Philosophy HERE, until the definitive version known to us all by the famous words of Thomas Jefferson  who “…took his division of rights into alienable and unalienable from Hutcheson, who made the distinction popular and important”, and in the 1776 United States Declaration of Independence, famously condensed this to:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…”


Also, we need to have an understanding of our other rights too, including our Human Rights and our EU rights.

I have supplied many useful links to other resources throughout my main web site, in order to aid you with regards to Common Law matters (as well as other interesting stuff!), so please try to research some of these sources. You will learn much, and the practicability of what you’ll learn should quickly become apparent to you, and how you can use those research findings, to your own advantage.

I know that many people are suffering real hardship, and many are also facing financial ruin, what you will learn though, should help tip the balance back in your own favour. Please don’t despair, don’t bury your head in the sand, fight back. Much of what’s happened to you is deception and fraud, once you undersatnd the true meaning of ‘Contracts’ especially the difference between unilateral and bilateral contracts, then your sense of freedom will start to grow. You will then be on the path to financial and real freedom.

More soon but check out the video below for an overview on the important subject of money!!! Indeed watch the whole series, brilliantly written by Paul Grignon…everyone can understand it!


My RSS Feeds

The RSS feeds at the right of the page (within the Blog area), have links to many interesting articles on law from the Open University. You may find these useful in your quest to understand common law and its application.

Consider using them on your own site, as they are very informative and easy to digest.

Parking Tickets – and how to beat them!

I noticed this peice  where I see Michael has had some success, I think many of you will be delighted at the outcome there.

Go and check it out now!!!!