ToadKing
Illegal Lawyer
Public Defender
Senator
Supporter
Aventura Resident
5th Anniversary
Change Maker
Popular in the Polls
Statesman
ToadKing__
Public Defender
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2025
- Messages
- 330
- Thread Author
- #1
Case Filing
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
IgnitedTnT (represented by ToadKing)
Plaintiff
v.
Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complain against the Defendants as follows:
I. PARTIES
1. IgnitedTnT2. Commonwealth of Redmont
II. FACTS
1. On 2 January 2026, the Department of Construction and Transportation commenced an auction for Plot C116. (P-001)2. The auction announcement specified a starting bid of $11,817 and included the Auction Levy policy. (P-001)
3. The Auction Levy policy requires bidders to calculate and include the required tax separately in their bid message, stating: "Bids by players who own enough plots to warrant an auction levy must include the amount of tax that would be paid if the bid is successful." (P-001)
4. The policy further states: "Any bid not including the levy amount (when applicable) or including a miscalculated amount is to be considered invalid." (P-001)
5. The auction announcement states at the bottom: "By participating in an auction, you agree to the terms of, and to be bound to, the Department's Auction Policy." (P-001)
6. The DCT's Auction Policy states: "By participating in an Auction, you enter into an agreement with the Department on these terms and to be legally bound by them." (P-002)
7. By participating in the auction and submitting bids, both the Plaintiff and the Commonwealth entered into a binding contractual agreement under the terms of the Auction Policy.
8. Both the Plaintiff and Slay_Boy participated in the auction by submitting bids. (P-003)
9. Between 03 January 2026 and 04 January 2026, both the Plaintiff and Slay_Boy engaged in competitive bidding. (P-003)
10. On 4 January 2026, Slay_Boy submitted a bid stating "40k bank" without any Auction Levy calculation. (P-003)
11. On 4 January 2026, Slay_Boy submitted a bid stating "50k bank" without any Auction Levy calculation. (P-003)
12. The Plaintiff responded with a bid of "51k" on 04 January 2026 at 07:43 UTC. (P-003)
13. Slay_Boy subsequently made additional bids stating "60k bank" and other amounts, none of which included the required Auction Levy calculation. (P-003)
14. Only the Plaintiff and Slay_Boy made subsequent competing bids after the Plaintiff's "51k" bid. (P-003)
15. On 6 January 2026, the DCT paused the auction. (P-004)
16. On 6 January 2026, a DCT employee (Rookieblue14) stated: "@Slay_Boy's bids are declared invalid as he was required to note he was subject to a levy." (P-004)
17. The same DCT officer stated: "@IgnitedTnT Your bid at 51k will be considered the high bid, as it was the most recent valid. Clock will run from the above message." (P-004)
18. On 6 January 2026, the DCT resumed the auction, stating: "This auction is resumed. From this message, this auction will run for at least 24 hours." (P-004)
19. Slay_Boy then submitted a bid stating "167k bank" without including the required Auction Levy calculation in the bid message itself. (P-004)
20. Rookieblue14, subsequently declared: "This bid remains invalid as it does not comply with the requirements in the Plot Regulations Act." (P-004)
21. Despite declaring Slay_Boy's bids invalid, the DCT continued to allow the auction to proceed rather than awarding the plot to the Plaintiff based on their last valid bid of 51k.
22. The Auction Rules, provide: "Bidders may not double bid during an auction, which is defined as the participant having the current high bid and raising it again." (P-002)
23. Since the Plaintiff's 51k bid was the last valid bid, any subsequent bids by the Plaintiff constitute prohibited double bidding under the DCT's own rules.
24. The Default Winner Rules provide: "The highest valid bid at auction end is the default winner." (P-002)
25. The Default Winner Rules provide: "If the winning bid becomes invalid (e.g., insufficient funds, deportation, or departure from the server), the next highest bidder is offered the plot." (P-002)
26. The auction announcement states: "Auction Ends: 24 hours after last bid." (P-001)
III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
Breach of Contract
Section 7 of the Contracts Act states:The Defendant breached its contractual obligations under the Auction Policy by failing to invalidate bids that violated the Auction Levy requirements correctly, specifically, all bids by Slay_Boy that failed to include the required levy calculation in the bid message, and by failing to award the plot to the Plaintiff as the holder of the "highest valid bid at auction end" as required by the Default Winner Rules.
The DCT improperly resumed the auction that should have ended 24 hours after the Plaintiff's last valid bid of 51k on 04 January 2026 at 07:43 UTC, thereby failing to apply its Auction Policy consistently despite the DCT's duty to "conduct auctions fairly and in strict accordance with its guidelines" as established in smokeyybunnyyy v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2024] FCR 103. In that case, the Federal Court held that "every department within the executive branch has a duty of care to uphold its constitutional obligations" and that "for the Department of Construction and Transport, this includes the responsibility to conduct auctions fairly and in strict accordance with its guidelines."
The Court found that when invalid bids "were not permitted under DCT policy, they should have been invalidated, and the plaintiff's subsequent bids should not have been considered, as they were made under the false belief that [the invalid bids] were legitimate."
Here, the circumstances are materially identical: Slay_Boy's bids lacking the required Auction Levy calculations were not permitted under DCT policy and should have been invalidated, and the Plaintiff's subsequent bids after "51k" should not have been considered, as they were made under the false belief that Slay_Boy's invalid bids were legitimate.
The Court in [2024] FCR 103 held that "this inconsistency represents a breach of the DCT's duty to apply its policies fairly and equally across all auctions," and that "the combination of fraudulent inducement and the DCT's failure to apply its policies consistently across similar auctions constitutes a breach of duty that has resulted in damages to the plaintiff." By failing to properly conclude the auction after the Plaintiff submitted the last valid bid, the DCT created a situation where the Plaintiff was forced to make prohibited double bids.
The Auction Policy's Default Winner Rules explicitly establish the proper procedure for handling invalid bids: "The highest valid bid at auction end is the default winner," and "If the winning bid becomes invalid (e.g., insufficient funds, deportation, or departure from the server), the next highest bidder is offered the plot." When the DCT declared Slay_Boy's bids invalid for failing to include the required Auction Levy calculations, the policy required the DCT to identify the highest valid bid - the Plaintiff's 51k bid on 04 January 2026 at 07:43 UTC - and award the plot to the Plaintiff at that price. Instead of following its own clearly stated procedure, the DCT improperly resumed the auction, thereby abandoning the Default Winner Rules and creating an arbitrary, unpredictable auction process that violated the binding agreement all participants entered into when they submitted their bids.
The Auction Policy states, "By participating in an Auction, you enter into an agreement with the Department on these terms and to be legally bound by them," thereby these failures constitute material breaches of binding contractual obligations, entitling the Plaintiff to specific performance (transfer of Plot C116) under Section 7(a) of the Contracts Act.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff respectfully request that this Court grant the following relief:1. A Court Order directing the Commonwealth to immediately transfer ownership of Plot C116 to the Plaintiff at the price of their last valid bid of $51,000, pursuant to Section 7 of the Contracts Act and the Default Winner Rules of the DCT Auction Policy.
2. $2,000 in Legal Fees pursuant to Legal Damages Act, Section 9.
EVIDENCE
Discord - Group Chat That’s All Fun & Games
Discord is great for playing games and chilling with friends, or even building a worldwide community. Customize your own space to talk, play, and hang out.
By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.
DATED: This 6th day of January 2026
Motion
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION FOR EMERGENCY INJUNCTION
Your Honour,
Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court issue an emergency injunction to immediately freeze all activity on the C116 auction, including prohibiting acceptance of any further bids and prohibiting transfer of ownership to any party, until this matter is resolved.
The Plaintiff faces immediate and irreparable harm as they may permanently lose property that rightfully belongs to them under the DCT's own binding Auction Policy.
