Homeward Bound Export Cherry Project Pty Ltd v Farm Working Hands Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 447

Homeward Bound Export Cherry Project Pty Ltd v Farm Working Hands Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 447

Leave was refused because the applicant identified no sufficient error, issue of principle or injustice. The affidavit material did not sufficiently identify a dispute about finance charges, as the reference to "other margins" concerned the worker-related matters described in the affidavit and not a late-payment finance charge. Nor did the material reasonably raise an allegation that charges were made for employees who did not exist; paragraph 9 was read in context as supporting the allegation that false names were used by employees claiming Centrelink benefits. The only variation made was the respondent's accepted correction of a clerical error in the amount of the statutory demand.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal in Corporations Statutory Demand Proceedings / Court of Appeal Application for Leave to Appeal From Orders Varying and Otherwise Refusing to Set Aside a Statutory Demand
Outcome
Order varied to correct the amount; application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs; notice of appeal otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
['statutory Demand' 'setting Aside Statutory Demand' 'genuine Dispute' 'leave to Appeal' 'supporting Affidavit Under S 459 G']
['corporations Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['statutory Demand' 'setting Aside Statutory Demand' 'genuine Dispute' 'leave to Appeal' 'supporting Affidavit Under S 459 G']

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
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal in Corporations Statutory Demand Proceedings / Court of Appeal Application for Leave to Appeal From Orders Varying and Otherwise Refusing to Set Aside a Statutory Demand

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Corporations List Judge's orders varying and otherwise refusing to set aside the statutory demand." 'Whether the supporting affidavit material filed within the relevant period sufficiently identified a dispute about finance charges.' 'Whether the supporting affidavit material sufficiently identified a dispute about claimed charges for alleged phantom employees.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the applicant identified no sufficient error, issue of principle or injustice. The affidavit material did not sufficiently identify a dispute about finance charges, as the reference to "other margins" concerned the worker-related matters described in the affidavit and not a late-payment finance charge. Nor did the material reasonably raise an allegation that charges were made for employees who did not exist; paragraph 9 was read in context as supporting the allegation that false names were used by employees claiming Centrelink benefits. The only variation made was the respondent's accepted correction of a clerical error in the amount of the statutory demand.

Court Disposition

Order varied to correct the amount; application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs; notice of appeal otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Order 1 made by the Supreme Court on 9 July 2012 be varied by omitting $108,253.06 and in its place inserting $101,873.06.' 'Application for leave to appeal be dismissed with costs.' 'Notice of Appeal otherwise filed be dismissed.']