Graywinter Properties Pty Ltd v Esplanade Hotel Busselton Pty Ltd [1998] FCA 869

The pendency of an appeal, absent a stay, does not constitute a genuine dispute or sufficient reason to set aside a statutory demand under ss 459H(1)(a) or 459J(1)(b), and no grounds were provided to justify an extension of time for compliance.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 19 June 1998
Procedural Posture: Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Judgment on Application
Outcome: Application dismissed
Legal Topics: ['statutory Demand' 'genuine Dispute' 'extension of Time' 'cross Claim']

['corporations Law'] ['statutory Demand' 'genuine Dispute' 'extension of Time' 'cross Claim']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Judgment on Application

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether the existence of an appeal constitutes a genuine dispute under s 459H(1)(a) of the Corporations Law' 'Whether the pendency of an appeal or a possible cross-claim is a sufficient reason to set aside a statutory demand under s 459J(1)(b)' 'Whether grounds exist for an extension of time to comply with the statutory demand']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

['The application to set aside the statutory demand dated 23 February 1998 served by the respondent on the applicant is dismissed.' "The applicant is to pay the respondent's costs of the application including reserved costs and the costs of the directions hearing on 12 May 1998."]