🧾 Summary:

This document served formal notice to the Magistrates’ Court declaring:

• Lack of lawful jurisdiction over the living man (:Waseem: Malik.) due to procedural voids
• Non-recognition of corporate fiction or PERSON derivative
• Refusal of consent to implied contract or commercial venue
• Instruction to cease proceedings absent verified contract, jurisdictional grant, or rebuttal of standing

⚖️ Legal Foundation:

• Bills of Exchange Act 1882 – dishonour through silence equals liability
• Magna Carta 1215 / Constitutional Law Provisions – common law sovereignty asserted
• Trust Law Constructs – Notice serves as equitable withdrawal of consent

📘 Exhibit U – WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO (Authority Rebuttal)

🧾 Summary:

This document was directed to Thames Valley Police and presiding officials, demanding:

• Proof of lawful authority to act against the living man
• Disclosure of warrant, jurisdictional source, and legal standing
• Notice that unrebutted silence triggers personal liability and dishonour
• Prohibition of further interference under claim of right or color of law

⚖️ Legal Foundation:

• Quo Warranto Doctrine – “By what authority do you act?”
• Case Law Invoked: R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Fire Brigades Union [1995]