Glazier Holdings Pty Ltd v Meehan [2004] NSWSC 185

Glazier Holdings Pty Ltd v Meehan [2004] NSWSC 185

The statutory demand should be set aside because, although the plaintiff’s claims arising from the account-taking are not available as 'offsetting claims' under s 459H of the Corporations Act since they are payable to the trust and not directly to the plaintiff, the existence of those substantial ongoing claims relating to the same subject matter makes it unjust to enforce the demand in the interim, amounting to 'some other reason' under s 459J(1)(b).

Parties
Plaintiff: Glazier Holdings Pty Limited; First Defendant: Graham Meehan; Second Defendant: Anthony Murphy; Third Defendant: Treykell Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
Notice of demand set aside.
Legal Topics
Winding Up by Court, Statutory Demand, Offsetting Claims, Substantial Injustice, Costs Orders
Corporations Law Equity Winding Up by Court Statutory Demand Offsetting Claims Substantial Injustice Costs Orders

Case Brief

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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glazier Holdings Pty Limited

Plaintiff

Graham Meehan

First Defendant

Anthony Murphy

Second Defendant

Treykell Pty Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Judgment at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal proceedings were concluded for the purpose of enforcement of costs order and statutory demand
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff had an offsetting claim within the meaning of s 459H of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
  3. 3 Whether 'some other reason' under s 459J(1)(b) exists to set aside the statutory demand

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory demand should be set aside because, although the plaintiff’s claims arising from the account-taking are not available as 'offsetting claims' under s 459H of the Corporations Act since they are payable to the trust and not directly to the plaintiff, the existence of those substantial ongoing claims relating to the same subject matter makes it unjust to enforce the demand in the interim, amounting to 'some other reason' under s 459J(1)(b).

Court Disposition

Notice of demand set aside.

Orders

  • The defendants' notice of demand under s 459E of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) served on the plaintiff on 9 July 2003 is set aside.
  • The defendants are to pay the plaintiff's costs of these proceedings.