It is virtually impossible to live in this “modern world” and not interact with others through contracts. It is also impossible to follow the teachings provided in scripture without participating in contracts for they offer man the opportunity to progress in accord with man’s covenants with our Creator.
Where the principle elements of contracts, trusts and the concept of the corporation sole bring light to almost any relationship, we present them here together to help you better understand the various relationships with which you may be involved. To better understand all such matters, we first provide you with:
- First understand who the parties are (from their origin);
- Always know yourself first (start at Genesis 1:26–28);
- Discover the true nature of all other parties second;
- Then you must understand the historical and environmental nature of the relationship; and,
- Only then can you understand how applicable laws may effect the relationship; thus, it’s time to thoroughly study such laws.
- Rule 1: To understand any relationship you must:
Rule 2: Review the details in question (in the relationship) only after you have completed the review required by Rule 1, then review the actual terms of the relationship and the details in question in accord with what you learned from applying Rule 1.
(Team Law beneficiaries should review this example: What is my relationship?)
Therefore, we set this standard as the Standard for Review of any situation involving a relationship between parties. Team Law uses this standard for review in every review we do. It is key reason we rarely get anything wrong in our reviews; the other reasons are we always go to the source and verify facts rather than ever trusting any third party information; and, we stick to the law and historical facts.
Thus, this Standard may wisely be used as an elemental Key to living and securing permanent Liberty in your natural capacity as you serve in any other capacity in anything you may do throughout your life. It is certainly how our Admin choses to live.
Having set that standard for review let’s now move on to that special kind of relationship at the center of this topic — contracts.
A contract, as we will consider the subject here, is defined as:
Black's Law Dictionary, 7th edition wrote:1. An agreement between two or more parties creating obligations that are enforceable or otherwise recognizable at law.
Every contract, whether written or merely implied, must have all of the following elements:
- a giver;
- a receiver;
- valuable consideration over time; and,
So, when reviewing a relationship, to verify its contractual nature, ask yourself if those elements (numbered above) are included in the relationship in question; if they are then the relationship is contractual, whether or not a written contract was made.
The particular type of contract we are reviewing in this topic is — the Trust.
Simply stated, a trust is defined as:
To say the same thing with a bit more definitive complexity:Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged. On 23 June 2005 Merriam-Webster wrote:A property interest held by one person for the benefit of another.
Black’s Law Dictionary, 7th Edition wrote:The right, enforceable solely in equity, to the beneficial enjoyment of property to which another person holds the legal title; a property interest held by one person (the trustee) at the request of another (the settlor) for the benefit of a third party (the beneficiary). •For a trust to be valid, it must involve a specific property, reflect the settlor’s intent, and be created for a lawful purpose. … • A trust arises as a result of a manifestation of an intention to create it.
The bottom line: having reviewed the results of many court cases regarding the creation of trusts we found that the creation of a trust can best be reduced to the following statement:
- Anytime any party (for a lawful purpose) gives any other party something to hold that does not belong to that other party.
- a Creator (settlor);
- a Trustee;
- a Beneficiary; and,
- the Corpus or body of the trust — a specific property, some thing of value placed in trust with the Trustee by the Creator.
- The relationship was intentionally created for a lawful purpose.
To do this, ask yourself:
- “Does it have a Giver?”
- Yes, the Giver is the trust’s Creator.
- “Does it have a Receiver?”
- Yes, the Receiver is the trust itself.
- “Does it have a valuable consideration over time?”
- Yes, the trust’s Corpus (res) is something of value that the Trust has agreed to so hold in trust until such time as it must be delivered to the trust’s Beneficiary or it is otherwise consumed or disbursed.
- “Does it have Acceptance?”
- Yes, The Giver offered the res and the Trustee (acting for the trust) accepted it in trust; therefore, it has acceptance.
Now notice: As with any other person the capacity to make decisions and physically perform acts requires both consciousness and physical capacity; however, contracts do not possess such actual qualities; therefore, in order to create the capacity for such qualities in a contract specific offices are created/described within the terms of the contract. In a trust indenture (contract) the office so created by contract is the Trustee. Therefore within the terms of every trust’s contractual agreement (with or without a written Indenture), of necessity, there must be a defined a “Trustee capacity”; which is the Office within the Trust through which all action is taken. This is where the “corporation sole” comes in.
The Corporation Sole
The corporation sole is most simply defined as: “Consciousness created in contract.” It is the basis of the legal concept of corporate immunity. Contrary to marketing materials predatory marketers use bilk people out of their hard earned resources, the corporation sole is not (and cannot be) a separate entity in and of itself; rather, it is the nature of certain offices, entities and/or capacities, like: corporate (and political) presidents, CEOs, managers, governors, ministers and trustees.
To understand what the corporation sole nature is, one must understand what ‘consciousness created in contract’ is. Respectively, you will notice that the decision making ability necessarily included in any office (or official capacity) in any organization requires both the decision making capacity and the physical ability to execute such decisions, once made; also, notice that though a written document (like a Trust Indenture) can create the office of Trustee (that is, the capacity for such consciousness and physicality), it cannot create the actual consciousness or physical capacity necessary to exercise the contractually created will of the organization. Such actual consciousness and physical capacity must be borrowed from someone that has actual consciousness and the physical capacity to exercise the same. In law, such a contractually created capacity for consciousness is called —a corporation sole. Therefore, the Trust’s contract creates the Trust’s capacity for consciousness, which capacity officially resides in the office of the Trustee and that office (or capacity) exists in the nature of 'a corporation sole'; as do the offices of: CEOs, presidents, managers, governors, judges, mayors and any other capacity that fits the definition of a “consciousness created in contract.”
The 'corporation sole' is like the "soul" of the thing; in that it brings actual life to the contractually created entity.
By its very nature, a corporation sole is an extra jurisdictional capacity; that means the corporation sole is the cause of corporate immunity; because, it is unassailable in any jurisdiction. This is because the corporation sole cannot act for itself; rather, it acts only as the entity (the person) for whom the contractual consciousness was created. In other words, so long as the party lending consciousness and physical capacity to the corporation sole functions within the terms of the agreement that created the corporation sole (the office), the lender is immune from prosecution for the lawful acts of the entity to which the corporation sole provides consciousness and physical capacity. (Please take note of the P.S. below!)
Thus, because the capacity or office of Trustee was created so that the Trust can function, when the Trustee acts [in accord with its Indenture (contract)] it is the Trust that is acting and not the person lending consciousness and physical capacity to that office. In other words, the person that lends consciousness and physical capacity to the office is not the Office/Trustee; they simply lend the Trust actual consciousness and physical capacity so that the same can be used in the office of its Trustee; without which, the Trust could not actually do what it was contracted to do. Therefore, again, whenever the Trustee acts, it is the Trust that is acting and not the man who so lends the Trust actual consciousness and physical capacity.
If you review your relationships with this information in mind, you should understand them better. Though a further review of this topic, as it relates to the relationship most people have with Corp. U.S., would better provide a level of understanding that would allow people to control Corp. U.S. and would be of great help in restoring our nation that level of support would require Team Law beneficiary support; wherefore, we created that review in the Team Law Beneficiary Forum at this link: Social Security Administration created Trusts.
For those of you that do not have access to that forum, we hope this information is helpful to you as is.
Attention Team Law beneficiaries:
If you’re interested, when you finish reading this post go to the Team Law Beneficiary Forum and read the article called, Social Security Administration created Trusts, where we will continue with this review by reviewing the relationship that stands as the nexus with virtually all connections most people today have with commerce, industry and/or government.
P.S. People should beware of anyone (agent provocateurs, predatory marketers, etc.) alleging they can create an entity called a “Corporation Sole” that separately operates directly in commerce or business relations. Such marketers allege such creations are immune from taxes or other obligations that would otherwise attach to people, trusts, corporation and partnerships. Such allegations are false! This misleading idea comes from the fact that there are statutes and case law recognizing the absolute immune nature of the corporation sole capacity (consciousness created in the contract of another entity) and the fact that anyone can create such a capacity; this fact becomes misleading when the marketer provides the fuzzy logic that anyone should be able to generate a corporation sole and use it to act like a church and then enter commerce or business relations and remain immune. The problem with this concept is easily understood if we go back to the example of the Trust and notice, what the marketer alleges is they can create the corporation sole as a stand alone entity; thus, they allege they can remove the office from the trust and have it act of its own volition, without the Trust. What would happen if they did that: they would have either created:
- a General Partnership between the entity they created and those that operated it, thus removing the corporation sole nature from the entity leaving only their empty allegation that it is one; or,
- another trust (they call a corporation sole even though it is not), with no difference in immunity, liability, responsibility or operation from any other trust.
For sound information regarding proper asset protection systems we would contact The Way of Kings™.