ACN 078 592 908 Pty Ltd v Access RnD Tax Solutions Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 59

ACN 078 592 908 Pty Ltd v Access RnD Tax Solutions Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 59

The plaintiff established a genuine dispute about the existence of the $29,311 debt. Although aspects of the evidence cast doubt on the plaintiff's position, the alleged fee agreement was not in writing, the documentary references to negotiations and discussions were oblique, Mr Pegum gave sworn evidence denying the...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside a Creditors' Statutory Demand / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Statutory demand set aside; defendant ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs.
Legal Topics
['statutory Demand' 'genuine Dispute as to Existence or Amount of Debt' 'research and Development Tax Incentive Services' 'oral Fee Agreement']
['corporations' 'insolvency' 'contract'] ['statutory Demand' 'genuine Dispute as to Existence or Amount of Debt' 'research and Development Tax Incentive Services' 'oral Fee Agreement']

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside a Creditors' Statutory Demand / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was a genuine dispute about the existence or amount of the $29,311 debt claimed in the statutory demand.' "Whether the plaintiff agreed that the defendant's fee for the 2012-2013 year would be calculated on the defendant's asserted standard terms." 'Whether the expression "2-5%" in the 2 November 2012 email created uncertainty as to the alleged fee agreement.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff established a genuine dispute about the existence of the $29,311 debt. Although aspects of the evidence cast doubt on the plaintiff's position, the alleged fee agreement was not in writing, the documentary references to negotiations and discussions were oblique, Mr Pegum gave sworn evidence denying the agreement, there was inconsistency in the defendant's evidence about immediate payment, and the unresolved meaning of "2-5%" in the 2 November 2012 email required further investigation. The dispute was therefore not shown to be spurious, fanciful or futile, and the statutory demand was set aside.

Court Disposition

Statutory demand set aside; defendant ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs.

Orders

  • ['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.' "Order that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings."]