Re the Queen of Australia – that is a question I have concerns about too. Darren mentions the Crown, the Queen and Consolidated Revenue. Now consolidated revenue is a constitutional element of the Commonwealth of Australia that is used to pay the Governor-General – so there is a perfect example of payments coming FROM it. The Queen in the Constitution has agreed to the contract, so is a living woman using her right of free will to agree. And the Crown in the Preamble is the combined authority over the United Kingdom, so the Crown in this country signifies the same.
However, the Queen of Australia is a corporate figurehead with no authority and the Aust Govt is self-identified as an administrative body, so we should inform the Cth of our new status I think. Having said that, if you go to COMMLAw – the lawful enactments are identified with a red australia on the blue background, while the others are statutory legislation – effectively identifying how the Aust Govt are to contractually operate. If you find an equitable clause in them it binds the Aust Govt, but I would also consider that you have to notify the Cth of the breach.
Having said that – my thoughts are we perfect our interest through the Cth with our requirements, using the stat leg as the focus for correction and breaches of our requirements.
I also think we need to consider APRA’s role in this. My husband and I created a reversionary doc in 2014, which closed down a case against us. Halfway through the day, APRA was given the opportunity to validate the doc and did so. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) is a statutory authority of the Australian Government and an independent statutory authority that supervises institutions across banking, insurance and superannuation and promotes financial system stability in Australia.
Here is all their enabling legislation – https://www.apra.gov.au/enabling-legislation
