Event and Time
Event Description
On 29 July 2022, the plaintiff filed an originating process seeking to set aside a statutory demand issued by the defendant on 7 July 2022, claiming that the statutory demand was defective and there was a genuine dispute regarding the debt amount. The statutory demand was based on various invoices allegedly owed by the plaintiff to the defendant for services rendered.
Application and Claims
The plaintiff's application to set aside the statutory demand was based on three primary grounds:
- Defectiveness: The statutory demand was claimed to be defective under s 459J of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), asserting that it failed to properly particularise the debt and that the amount claimed was not due and payable.
- Genuine Dispute: Under s 459H(1)(a), the plaintiff contended that there was a genuine dispute about the existence or amount of the debt outlined in the statutory demand.
- Offsetting Claims: Under s 459H(1)(b), the plaintiff asserted it had offsetting claims against the defendant for various reasons related to project performances and costs incurred due to alleged deficiencies in the defendant’s work.
Judicial Decisions
The court ultimately decided to set aside the statutory demand. The reasoning was based on the presence of genuine disputes regarding invoices and recognizing offsetting claims from the plaintiff against the defendant.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
Plaintiff's Claims:
- Debt Defectiveness: The plaintiff argued that the statutory demand was not properly supported by an affidavit verifying the debt and claimed that the debt was not ‘due and payable’.
- Genuine Dispute: The plaintiff presented evidence supporting its assertion that certain invoices were either paid or disputed by clients, indicating the debt claimed was not valid.
- Offsetting Claims: The plaintiff outlined multiple projects where it believed the defendant had caused financial harm due to delays and poor performance.