Dear Court,

I am requesting that a duty judge be assigned to an urgent interlocutory application.

Please note that this application is being conducted without prejudice to the commencement of any action in relation to the offences committed by the named defendants under section 600.01 (Violation of the Bill of Rights or Constitution) of the Criminal Code of the Mountain of Augusta.

INTRODUCTION

This is an application against two related defendants (the second defendant to be joined at the commencement of the hearing) seeking an interim injunction against the defendants jointly, severally and individually, their agents, servants or employees, restraining them from breaching my constitutional rights.

APPLICABLE LAW

Pursuant to article III of the Constitution of the Mountain of Augusta— > All persons have inherent dignity and the right to have their dignity respected and protected.

URGENT APPLICATION

By abusing me in the Discord server, my dignity has been infringed upon by the two named defendants. Dignity is defined by the Oxford Dictionary of English as "the state or quality of being worthy of honour or respect".

On the Discord, the named defendants made statements against me which act to diminish my dignity by imputing that I am a user worthy of contempt. You can clearly see these imputations in the evidence that I now proffer to the Court—

[1] https://i.imgur.com/NKFCq3E.png [2] https://i.imgur.com/LWbZsIO.png [3] https://i.imgur.com/rgwKkXq.png [4] https://i.imgur.com/L1FVpuc.png

It is clear that the imputations contained within these messages are capable of and substantially likely to diminish the ability for me to be worthy of honour or respect and thus infringe upon my dignity. By acting in this manner and telling these untruths, the named defendants have failed to respect and protect my dignity.

JURISDICTION EXTENDS TO STATEMENTS MADE ON DISCORD

Although obiter dicta comments were made by Justice Ahri in the pre-trial dismissal of the request in HenryDraton v. Rakkwal, these comments should not be followed by the Court. In that case Ahri J attempts to imply into the Constitution the fact that because the word "jurisdiction" is used in the article heading it follows that the clause "All laws of the State of Mount Augusta shall apply within these borders" means that the laws of the Mountain of Augusta apply only within the borders of the Mountain of Augusta. This is not a reasonable conclusion to be drawn from this clause. The wording of the clause is insufficient for this inference to be rationally drawn. The only available conclusion from the clause as it stands is that there is a statutory jurisdiction that extends to the physical borders of the Mountain of Augusta. It does not mean that these are the only places in which the Court has jurisdiction. The Court nevertheless has an inherent jurisdiction for anything under the direct control of the Mountain of Augusta. As it stands, the Discord is in a state analogous to that of the two subreddits that are considered official subreddits of the Mountain of Augusta. Would the Court hold that it has no jurisdiction over these subreddits? No. If it did, it would not be able to entertain cases on this subreddit. Therefore, it follows that the Court has jurisdiction over the Discord. The Discord is currently under the control of the Judges of the Mountain of Augusta and therefore is the same as the subreddits.

Submitted by Counsel this 25th day of May 2018