Lawsuit: Pending Ayatha v. The Crown, Case 15 (Ch. 2025)

[Aya]

Ayatha
V.
the Crown​

1. Jurisdiction
As a constitutional case pertaining to the powers of parliament as enshrined by the constitution, this case lay within the chancery's jurisdiction.

2. Parties
Applicants,
Ayatha, as an Independent Candidate for the Alexandrian Parliament

Respondents,
The Crown,
The 3rd Parliament of the Sovereign Kingdom of Alexandria

3. Facts
1. The constitution is a document that outlines the rights of both the citizens, and all organs of the Alexandrian government with explicit guidelines for what the organs of the government are allowed to do; with the presumption that the organizations of which derive their legitimacy from the document require passing a constitutional amendment (which is also outlined within the constitution) to change or add new capabilities that are not derived from it exactly.
2. The specific portion of the constitution in question (Part 1, Section 3, Point 7) explicitly reads: "Power to Impeach: Parliament has the authority to remove Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Officers for misconduct."
3. Legislative Officers have been defined out of existence according to the SpeakR-Act, and as such there are currently no Legislative Officers within Alexandria as there are none outlined.
4. Ayatha at no point was a member of the Cabinet, or the Judiciary, and thus at no point held the position of being a Judicial or Executive Officer
5. Ayatha was unlawfully removed from their position as MP utilising an illegal Motion to Remove passed by parliament when parliament does not have the right to remove MP's

4. Claims for Relief
1. An immediate recognition by the courts that Motions to Remove in their current form are illegal.
2. An immediate reinstatement of Ayatha's rightfully earned political office following their appointment by a near unanimous vote within Parliament.
3. The voiding of the Motion to Remove as it is recognised as illegal.

Prayer for Relief
I hope the Chancery will see the failings as clearly as Ameslap and everyone in the Politics channel does as this is a clearly illegal action underneath the constitution. If Parliament wishes to grant itself the capability to remove MPs, they should rightfully have it enshrined into the constitution as it is a very important thing to keep in mind for all individuals seeking public office, and there is no information that such a thing is even possible in any laws or the constitution itself; and parliament is drawing its authority from what seems to be nothing to do such.

 

[Aya]

Entreaty for Default Judgement
As I seek to expedite this as much as possible to save both my and the courts time, I will be motioning for a writ of default judgement as I am very clearly in the right, and I see literally no way for the Crown to disprove an argument so ironclad the Queen agrees to it. This is an open and shut case.

 

[Zodd]

IN THE CHANCERY OF ALEXANDRIA
WRIT OF SUMMONS
The Crown (@SoggehToast) is required to appear before the Chancery In the case of

Ayatha v. The Crown, Case 15 (Ch. 2025)

Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons may result in a default judgment based on the known facts of the case.

All parties will make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures (General and Chancery).


In agreement, the Chancery implements Rule 1 to this case. High Chancellor AsexualDinosaur is assigned as presiding officer.

The Crown is expected to provide an answer to the complaint and to respond to the entreaty for default judgement.​

 

[Aya]

Entreaty for Striking

As events have transpired from the initial filings of this case, I will recognise and request the striking of claim for relief #2 as I have been reconfirmed on my seat and as such require no reinstatement, and do not wish to waste the courts time with issues that have already been solved through other channels.

 

[CoolCat]

View attachment 979
IN THE CHANCERY OF ALEXANDRIA
WRIT OF SUMMONS
The Crown (@SoggehToast) is required to appear before the Chancery In the case of

Ayatha v. The Crown, Case 15 (Ch. 2025)

Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons may result in a default judgment based on the known facts of the case.

All parties will make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures (General and Chancery).


In agreement, the Chancery implements Rule 1 to this case. High Chancellor AsexualDinosaur is assigned as presiding officer.

The Crown is expected to provide an answer to the complaint and to respond to the entreaty for default judgement.​

Your honour,
Rubilubi55 present to represent the Crown.

 

[CoolCat]

Entreaty for Default Judgement
As I seek to expedite this as much as possible to save both my and the courts time, I will be motioning for a writ of default judgement as I am very clearly in the right, and I see literally no way for the Crown to disprove an argument so ironclad the Queen agrees to it. This is an open and shut case.

Answer to the Entreaty for Default Judgement

Your honours,
the General Court Rules and Procedures read the following about Writs and Entreaty for Default Judgement:
"A request to seek a decision without a full trial if there is no defence."

The Crown asks this court to not grant this Entreaty. A Entreaty for Default Judgement is to be filed when the defense does not present itself in front of the court within the given time. When the Entreaty has been filed the defense has not even been summoned yet and a Writ for Default Judgement would be unreasonable. Besides that the plaintiff does also argue that " [...] [She is] very clearly in the right [...]". However, this trial exists to determine who is in the right. Not allowing the Crown to answer would violate a fair trial.

 

[Zodd]

Entreaty for Striking

As events have transpired from the initial filings of this case, I will recognise and request the striking of claim for relief #2 as I have been reconfirmed on my seat and as such require no reinstatement, and do not wish to waste the courts time with issues that have already been solved through other channels.

The court will permit the amendment to the complaint.​

 

[Aya]

Entreaty for Default Judgement
It's been approximately 48 hours since the crown was supposed to appear in court to present their case, and according to the Crown themselves "A Entreaty for Default Judgement is to be filed when the defense does not present itself in front of the court within the given time."

 

[CoolCat]

Entreaty for Default Judgement
It's been approximately 48 hours since the crown was supposed to appear in court to present their case, and according to the Crown themselves "A Entreaty for Default Judgement is to be filed when the defense does not present itself in front of the court within the given time."

IN THE CHANCERY OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
Response to the Entreaty for Default Judgement

Your honours,
the Crown is present and therefore asks for this Entreaty to not be sustained.

Lawsuit: Pending Post in thread 'Ayatha v. The Crown, Case 15 (Ch. 2025)'

Monday at 3:14 AM

View attachment 979
IN THE CHANCERY OF ALEXANDRIA
WRIT OF SUMMONS
The Crown (@SoggehToast) is required to appear before the Chancery In the case of

Ayatha v. The Crown, Case 15 (Ch. 2025)

Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons may result in a default judgment based on the known facts of the case.

All parties will make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures (General and Chancery).


In agreement, the Chancery implements Rule 1 to this case. High Chancellor AsexualDinosaur is assigned as presiding officer.

The Crown is...​

• CoolCat

If the plaintiff however speaks about how no Response to the Complaint has been filed yet...
Your honours,
please be reminded that the Crown has not been obligated to file the Response to the Complaint yet. As seen in nearly every other court case the presiding judicial officer will always obligate the defense to file a Response to the Complaint. We have already appeared before this Court and have done everything we have been told to do.

 

[Zodd]

IN THE CHANCERY OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
Response to the Entreaty for Default Judgement

Your honours,
the Crown is present and therefore asks for this Entreaty to not be sustained.

Lawsuit: Pending Post in thread 'Ayatha v. The Crown, Case 15 (Ch. 2025)'

Monday at 3:14 AM

View attachment 979
IN THE CHANCERY OF ALEXANDRIA
WRIT OF SUMMONS
The Crown (@SoggehToast) is required to appear before the Chancery In the case of

Ayatha v. The Crown, Case 15 (Ch. 2025)

Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons may result in a default judgment based on the known facts of the case.

All parties will make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures (General and Chancery).


In agreement, the Chancery implements Rule 1 to this case. High Chancellor AsexualDinosaur is assigned as presiding officer.

The Crown is...​

• CoolCat

If the plaintiff however speaks about how no Response to the Complaint has been filed yet...
Your honours,
please be reminded that the Crown has not been obligated to file the Response to the Complaint yet. As seen in nearly every other court case the presiding judicial officer will always obligate the defense to file a Response to the Complaint. We have already appeared before this Court and have done everything we have been told to do.

The Crown is expected to provide an answer to the complaint and to respond to the entreaty for default judgement.​

Please file an answer within 48 hours, the court has been waiting.
@CoolCat​

 

[Aya]

Please file an answer within 48 hours, the court has been waiting.
@CoolCat​

Entreaty for Prompting

Your honour, I do not understand why the Court is granting an unrequested writ of continuance to the defense when they have failed to substantiate their case in full in the time provided and have similarly failed to file an Entreaty For Continuance. This is blatant favouritism towards the Crown, as if it were any other proceedings filed by any other individual the Entreaty for Default Judgement would have been carried out.

They have already been granted an abnormally long time period to respond, 24 hours longer than the outlined time period given for criminal cases, and now they are being granted even more time without requesting it?

Am I not entitled to a speedy and fair trial as per the constitution? Why must I suffer for the failings of the Crown?