NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: ACN 078 592 908 Pty Ltd v Access RnD Tax Solutions Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 59 Hearing dates: 16 December 2015 Date of orders: 12 February 2016 Decision date: 12 February 2016 Jurisdiction: Equity - Corporations List Before: Robb J Decision: (1) Order, pursuant to sections 449G and 449H of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) that the statutory demand dated 10 August 2015 served by the defendant on the plaintiff be set aside.
(2) Order that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings. Catchwords: CORPORATIONS – winding up – statutory demand – application for order setting aside – whether genuine dispute as to existence or amount of the debt – principles applicable – order made setting aside the statutory demand Legislation Cited: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Cases Cited: Britten-Norman Pty Ltd v Analysis & Technology Australia Pty Ltd [2013] NSWCA 344; (2013) 85 NSWLR 601 Eng Mee Yong v Letchumanan [1980] AC 331 Eyota Pty Ltd v Hanave Pty Ltd (1994) 12 ACSR 785 Category: Principal judgment Parties: ACN 078 592 908 Pty Ltd (Plaintiff) Access RnD Tax Solutions Pty Ltd (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr C Bova (Plaintiff) Mr D Robertson (Defendant)
Solicitors: Baker & McKenzie (Plaintiff) Mr James RG Bell (Defendant) File Number(s): 2015/257646 Publication restriction: Nil
Judgment 1. This is an application by the plaintiff, now called ACN 078 592 903 Pty Ltd, and formerly called Priava Pty Ltd, for an order setting aside a creditors' statutory demand (the demand) dated 10 August 2015 served upon it by the defendant, Access RnD Tax Solutions Pty Ltd. 2. The amount of the debt claimed is $34,811, and the schedule to the demand shows that the amount is made up of three invoices dated 1 November 2013, 1 December 2013 and 4 September 2013 for the sums of $2,500, $2,500 and $29,311 respectively. 3. The plaintiff paid $5,000 to the defendant on 25 August 2000, as it accepted that the debts the subject of the two invoices that each claimed $2,500 were owed to the defendant by the plaintiff. 4. The plaintiff applies under s 459G of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) on the ground set out in s 459H(1)(a). The issue is whether there is a genuine dispute about the existence or amount of the $29,311 debt claimed in the demand.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate