Truth On Trial - Part 3
By Gi Linda
By Gi Linda
I am Gillian Linda Norman, a self-representing co-defendant with the Nimbin GoodTimes in case #2017/00081825, Darwin v Norman, on the Defamation List. The matter is scheduled for second listing on September 15 at NSW Supreme Court before Justice Lucy McCallum.
The plaintiffs bringing defamation charges are Mark Darwin, Adrian Brennock, Phillip Dixon and Steven McSween, who have now added Mount Warning Eco Village Pty Ltd with a new complaint of “injurious falsehood” requesting orders that this Blog, “Mount Warning Eco Village Scam” be suppressed for causing “possible loss of commercial opportunity”.
Even before the hearings commenced, Mark Darwin, using his pseudonym “Dummass Boofhead”, had announced victory in advance in a gloating email. “Boofhead”, with characteristic “Ba-ha-ha-ha-ha” signature tune mingled with scoffing, menacing threats, wrote that Mark Darwin wished to inform me that he was wetting himself with delight because he had arranged for me to be bankrupted and sectioned for psychiatric examination, then intended to grab for himself my Mercedes 4wd.
On August 24, a Notice of Motion by the plaintiffs, made without reasonable notice to me, the respondent, and relying upon “confidential evidence” that I am not permitted to see, requested a Duty Judge to make a summary judgement for removal of this Blog without providing opportunity for defence.
The plaintiffs had kindly filled out for the Judge the appropriate form listing the expected orders, all ready to sign. Unfortunately for Darwin & co, with the matter listed for a 5 minute “directions hearing”, Justice Button did not make a summary judgement, as requested. Instead, he referred the matter to be heard the following day by Justice McCallum, who manages the defamation list.
This hearing on 25/8/17 was scheduled to last one hour, yet the plaintiffs’ representative, barrister Dauid Sibtain, spent three hours arguing that “injurious falsehood” had occurred with malicious intent, causing the plaintiffs financial distress, therefore the Blogs must be removed. To permit my response to the charges, Justice McCallum scheduled another hearing, the fourth for this case, listed for Friday, September 1st at NSW Supreme Court.
Context to the Claim
I am one of 27 defrauded victims who collectively paid the purchase price for a property at 3222 Kyogle Rd, Mt Burrell, NSW 2484, that has been kept under control of delinquent directors through a Trust improperly executed by the plaintiffs.
Investors in the property were defrauded as a result of misleading marketing by the same aspiring “developers” now involved in “Mt Warning Eco Village”. Our story has been reported in several newspapers and is extensively documented in our own online Blogs:
Most investors in the failed land-share “Community” were not informed that the advertised “home-sites” were located on water catchment land. A report by town planner Darryll Anderson warning that multiple occupancy would not be permitted on that property was hidden from investors in 2015 by project managers Mark Darwin and Adrian Brennock.
In 2016, when we discovered the deception, the “Community” split. Those who demanded accountability were driven off the land without return of investment. Others constructed dwellings and camps, and remained residing on the land in defiance of Council’s demands, until, a year later in 2017, they were forced to comply with Court orders of eviction.
 |
| Marketing Lures by Dreamweavers of Deception |
They are now advertising “Mt Warning Eco Village”, on adjoining property owned by Peter Van Lieshout, disavowing their roles and responsibilities as founders of the failed “Bhula Bhula Village Community”.
When my statutory demand for for $120,000 on the company Wollumbin Horizons Pty Ltd, was upheld in Brisbane Federal Court, Adrian Brennock, being self-appointed delinquent director, signed a “contract” with Mt Warning Eco Village Pty Ltd to buy our land for $2.25m, about $1m over market value.
Brennock then put the company into Voluntary Administration with Vincents Accountants, who are currently assisting the plaintiffs in a "phoenix move" to burn the company, disenfranchise investors and transfer the land asset to their private control.
Disenfranchised purchase money creditors with only an empty beneficial interest in a fraudulent Trust, were informed by Vincents that in order to enable transfer of our property to Mt Warning Eco Village, a deposit was secured by the plaintiffs with “vendor finance” consisting of a $1m mortgage over our land by Adrian Brennock, delinquent director of the “insolvent” company.
 |
| Mark Darwin, "Creator" at Mt Warning Eco Village |
Mt Warning Ecovillage - Misleading Marketing
Mt Warning Eco Village response to a Facebook inquiry:
“Hi Craig,
We are expecting for share holders to be able to start building in around august as that’s roughly when DA will be coming through. Shares start at $189k and go up to $325k for 2.5 acres (I acre you can clearable and build on and then you will have a 1.5 acre surrounding that). Pre DA sale price is 20% off so a $300k lot is $240 at the moment, a saving of $60k)”
The plaintiffs claim that appropriate development approval is in place for an existing ecovillage located on property owned by Peter van Lieshout between Mt Burrell and Kungar, NSW, formerly known as “Nightcap Forest”, and that this supposed development consent also extends to several other lots comprising their proposed “Mt Warning Eco Village”, thus validating solicitation of loans and sales of land-share parcels by the plaintiffs.
The claims are misleading: Modified Development Consent DA06/1054.01 was issued in 2011 in association with a 2009 DA06/1054 for a concept plan for Nightcap Village. Annexure A is a submission to Tweed Shire Council dated Jan 2017, from Darrell Anderson, Director, DAC Planning, [formerly Darryl Anderson Consulting], on behalf of Rainmaker Eco Investments Pty Ltd, [one of the companies operated by the plaintiffs]. The submission was intended to obtain Council’s acknowledgement that development was “physically commenced”, and that development approval for “Nightcap Village” did not lapse in 2014.
The response from Tweed Council does not provide the solicited acknowledgement of active development consent, although it is presented as supporting evidence of “existing development approval” for the proposed “Village”.
In relation to MDA06/1054.01, a carriageway survey was done in 2012. On June 16 2014, several dumpy pegs were placed in the ground to indicate where proposed access road might be situated in a concept plan for Nightcap Village proposed in DA06/1054. The DA was due to lapse on June 29, 2014 for failure of commencement.
In relation to the minimum acceptable activity for an inactive development to be considered “commenced”, s95(4) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act establishes that “Development consent… does not lapse if building, engineering or construction work relating to building, subdivision or work is physically commenced on the land to which the consent applies before the date on which the consent would otherwise have lapsed under this Section.”
Anderson argues that placement of stakes as surveyors’ markers, constitutes commencement of development, even though no actual physical building, engineering or construction work subsequently took place.
According to Tweed Council’s response in Annexure C, Lindsay McGavin, Manager for Development Assessment and Compliance with Tweed Council, says the prospective developers have not satisfied two preconditions, required for initiation of works, and so have failed to comply with necessary conditions for development commencement. Mr McGavin also notes that the supposed work relied upon does not form part of the development consent as amended, and also advises that “Council has no statutory role in confirmation of physical commencement of development.”
Council has confirmed in direct consultation that a decision as to whether the placing of surveyors’ dumpy pegs in the ground validly constitutes physical commencement is a judgement that can only be made by the Land and Environment Court subsequent to lodgement of a Development Application for Mt Warning Eco Village.
In minutes of a Tweed Shire Council Development Assessment Panel held on May 31, 2017, it is noted that the site has an historic Development Application, DA06/1054, for “Nightcap Village” but “commencement needs to be demonstrated.” The proposed site is also affected by restrictions relating to “drinking water catchment, existing and future water storage facilities.”
It is clear, therefore, that it cannot correctly be said by the plaintiffs that development approval for “Mt Warning Eco Village” or “Nightcap Village” is active, since preconditions to commencement of works have not been fulfilled, and adjudication of the validity of the claimed development has not occurred, and cannot occur prior to submission of a DA application for Mt Warning Eco Village, which has also not occurred.
Response to the Affidavit of Phillip Dixon, Third Plaintiff
My response to Phillip Dixon' s claim that the following allegations are false:
(a) That Mt Warning Eco Village is a scam — It is factually true and demonstrable with evidence that Dixon, Darwin, Brennock and others have been operating an "intentional" land-share fraud from 2014 until the present.
(b) That no habitation is allowed on the land located at 2924 and 2954 Kyogle Road, Kunghur, NSW.
The Blogs correctly state that no habitation is allowed on the home-sites currently being advertised and offered for sale. Although under normal circumstances dwelling could be permitted in these areas zoned RU2, in fact, habitation is prohibited on the advertised lots since they are located in environmentally sensitive areas reserved for rainwater catchment.
(c) That there is no development approval granted for Mount Warning Eco Village by Tweed Shire Council — True
(d) That Mount Warning Eco Village’s governance is the same as Wollumbin Horizons Pty Ltd
Mount Warning Eco Village is run by Mark Darwin, Adrian Brennock, Phillip Dixon, Cherrie Stokes, Martin Maddran and formely Steven and Kelly McSween, who were all involved in the land-share scam at 3222 Kyogle Rd. Mount Warning Eco Village’s governance also includes landowner Peter van Lieshout, who was not involved in the plaintiffs’ failed Community on the property adjoining his estate.
As co-director of Mount Warning Eco Village with landowner Peter van Lieshaupt and Cherrie Stokes, Phillip Dixon claims that because of the Blogs, four possible loan agreements have fallen through, totaling a commercial loss of $600,000 and putting at risk the plaintiffs’ ability to proceed with a Prospectus and Development Approval for the Land with a further potential commercial loss of over $46,000. This represents feared future loss, but does not prove actual damage.
Phillip Dixon claims Mount Warning Eco Village Pty Ltd is relying on Loan Agreements to purchase our land at 3222 Kyogle Rd, for $1m over market value and complains that the Blogs may jeopardize this attempted phoenix move. His complaint represents feared future loss of commercial opportunity, but does not prove actual damage caused by the Blogs.
Phillip Dixon cites his plans as director of “Cannabis Industries Australia”, (CIA) to establish a cannabis farm and claims he will suffer potential financial loss of $650,000 because of a Blog post which exposes details of the plaintiffs’ fraudulent venture involving sale of shares in a non-existent “Cannabis University” offering to dispense “medical cannabis”.
Phillip Dixon provides no evidence that information conveyed in the Blogs has caused or will cause his possible failure to procure loans, or any other loss of future commercial opportunity.
Response to the Affidavit of Adrian Brennock, Second Plaintiff
The Second Plaintiff, Adrian Brennock, is the self-appointed director and sole shareholder of the company Wollumbin Horizons that owns the land paid for by defrauded investors.
Imputations complained of are significantly true and have been answered in detail in previous defence.
Imputations complained of are significantly true and have been answered in detail in previous defence.
Allegations made against me by Adrian Brennock are false and maliciously defamatory.
The affidavit contains many perjured statements including:
(a) False accounts of legal proceedings I have brought against the plaintiffs.
(b) False accounts of the plaintiffs’ dealings with Tweed Council.
(c) A false account of my Genuine Steps initiative of settlement in the Federal Court.
(a) False accounts of legal proceedings I have brought against the plaintiffs.
(b) False accounts of the plaintiffs’ dealings with Tweed Council.
(c) A false account of my Genuine Steps initiative of settlement in the Federal Court.
