Quebec et al. v. Baustralia – Summary

The Supreme Court heard the case filed by the Kingdom of Quebec and the Kingdom of Ikonia against the Kingdom of Baustralia on the 18th of May.

The charges were as follows:

1. Disturbance of the peace
2. Forcing other micronations to join Baustralia
3. Illegal occupation of Kapreburg
4. Defamation of character
5. War, in violation of the GUM Charter
6. Claims on previously-held micronational territory
7. Contempt of court in Quebec

Supreme Judge reached the following decisions:

1. Declined to adjudicate: The Supreme Judge stated that the matter in question related to the rules of MicroWiki and was therefore for the MW Administrators to adjudicate on.
2. Declined to adjudicate: The Supreme Judge stated that there was no evidence that Baustralia had “forced” any nation to join it beyond persistently asking them.
3. Declined to adjudicate: The Supreme Judge ruled that the plaintiffs had not provided sufficient evidence to suggest that Baustralia’s occupation of Kapreburg contravened national or international law, especially considering that the Treaty of Chariotsville tacitly acknowledged Baustralia’s claim over the area.
4. Declined to adjudicate: The Supreme Judge stated that there is no recourse in law for “name-calling”.
5. Declined to adjudicate: The Supreme Judge stated that in all conflicts which were part of the Baustralian Conquest, either Baustralia was justified in defending itself, or Quebec had been complicit in Baustralia’s actions.
6. Declined to adjudicate: The Supreme Judge ruled that Baustralia’s expansion into land held by recently dissolved nations was a political rather than a legal issue.
7. Declined to adjudicate: The Supreme Judge ruled that the case in question was a local, internal matter over which the GUM had no jurisdiction.

The case was therefore dismissed.

One thought on “Quebec et al. v. Baustralia – Summary

  1. Quebec you were just saying join you over and over then “occupied” us with no troops

    Declined to adjudicate: The Supreme Judge stated that there was no evidence that Baustralia had “forced” any nation to join it beyond persistently asking them. same thing you did to me.

    So good day.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s