of house. Mrs Holmes submitted two court orders from the Lancaster County Court with this court on 2nd April 2004 for registration. The two orders submitted were true copies of the orders made. However, the courts administration did not follow the rules laid down ensuring that the copy orders submitted were certified copies. I enclose herewith of the orders submitted by Mrs Holmes on 2nd April 2004 and the certified copies of these orders, and I apologise for any inconvenience that may have been caused. Yours sincerely,
Carol Dowd Director of Court Services C.c.
R P Corkhill, Chief Registrar
I NEVER used the expression “front of house” – that is in a theatre. “The Courts administration did not follow the rules laid down!” That is maladministration. Mrs Holmes submitted two court orders from the Lancaster County Court with this court on 2 nd April 2004 for registration. The two orders submitted were true copies of the orders made. However, the courts administration did not follow the rules laid down ensuring that the copy orders submitted were certified copies.
In fact, the rules laid down were not followed because:1. The “orders” were not made by a court of superior record; 2. The “orders” were not actually “custody orders” as defined in the Guardianship of Minors Act 1971 [or the Guardianship Act 1973] or the Guardianship of Infants Act 1953; 3. The court that made the “orders” did not make the application to register such “orders”; 4. No supporting documentation accompanied the “orders”; and 5. Neither were the “orders” certified; but when purportedly certified “orders” were obtained, the certification was by a clerk and not “the Judge or a Registrar”. In actual fact the “orders” were void ab initio because they [three out of the four] were headed Children Act 1989 and the Children Act 1989 does not extend to the Isle of Man; it is NOT listed in the Chronological Table of Acts of Parliament Extending to the Isle of Man prepared for the Isle of Man Government in July 2003. No Deemster bothered to read this document. In July 2007, Chief Registrar Peter Corkhill wrote to Mannin Chambers – From an inspection of the file DIV 2004/114 [sic] it would appear that the two orders were registered with the Court in the Isle of Man by this office erroneously, i.e. not in accordance with the requirements of the Child Custody Act 1987. However, Deputy Deemster Williamson made the order of 5th November 2004, effectively endorsing the provisions of the Orders from the Court in Lancaster. Upon an examination of the file DIV 2004/114 [sic] in 2006, it was noted that documents submitted by Yvonne Holmes were not certified copies and therefore certified copies of the two Orders were sought by this office from the Lancaster County Court. A comparison of the February 2004 documents shows that the copies submitted by Yvonne Holmes were true copies but not certified copies. For some reason we do not have certified copies of the October 2004 documents.
But on 27th February 2007, a Mrs Voirrey Moore of the Civil Summary Team (in the High Court Office) sent a letter to me with the following – Dear Sir Registration of Court Order – Katarina May Holmes and Peter Elliot Benedict Holmes I am in receipt of your undated letter regarding the registration of an order issued under the -3-