OVERVIEW

Vs DIUS

HOME

Vs KRONOFOGS

Vs SKATTEVerket

Vs QLTR edinburgh

Vs SPSO

SUMMARY

B  e  n  V  e  r  s  u  s    |    c  i  v  i  l     i  s  s  u  e s

B e n   C o l l i n s  |   Åkarhagsgatan 2C, 72337 Västerås, Sweden  | +46 727 447422  |  email  |  Website © 2014

R.I.P. Mum

Hop to the next page Hop to the previous page

?

Vs skatteverket

Concordia res parvae crescent work together to accomplish more

Opens summary cartoon in a larger format in a new window Opens image in a larger format in a new window

BC vs KF & SV Göteborg - 2006 : Case summary


Comments and status

title 42 USC Sect. 1983

Amendment 4, US Constitution:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Could not happen in the US, so why is it possible in the EU?

The invasion of your home is a sacred thing. To then take things forcibly for money not owed and not repay them till nine months later after a year of desperate harassment and humiliation whilst working unpaid on ecotech trying to do something useful instead of just collecting money in a 9 to 5.

This was deemed ok by the JK verdict. How can that be ok? To be sent to the ECHR.

detsvkf49pages.pdf

110627PostSeptCommsBCvsSV&KF87pages.pdf

080901DavidVersusGoliathSV&KFonly48pages.pdf

Annex080901TaxReferencesDavidVersusGoliath123pages.pdf

Opens BenCC website at 2008 as a PDF in a new window Opens PDF in a new window

Jkin Swedish

JK translated

Opens PDF in a new window