Neodel v PRC [2001] NSWSC 197

Neodel v PRC [2001] NSWSC 197

The absence of an Australian address for payment, the inclusion of multiple debts, and the signature by the executive chairman do not cause substantial injustice or constitute defects requiring the statutory demand to be set aside. The application is dismissed.

Parties
Plaintiff: Neodel Pty Ltd T/A Bookaburra Books; Defendant: PRC Publishing Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Demand, Section 459 G, Defect in Statutory Demand, Address for Payment, Multiple Debts, Signature of Creditor
Corporations Law Statutory Demand Section 459 G Defect in Statutory Demand Address for Payment Multiple Debts Signature of Creditor

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Neodel Pty Ltd T/A Bookaburra Books

Plaintiff

PRC Publishing Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to specify an address in Australia for payment is a defect justifying setting aside a statutory demand
  2. 2 Whether inclusion of multiple debts in the demand constitutes a defect
  3. 3 Whether the demand was properly signed by an appropriate officer of the creditor

Ratio Decidendi

The absence of an Australian address for payment, the inclusion of multiple debts, and the signature by the executive chairman do not cause substantial injustice or constitute defects requiring the statutory demand to be set aside. The application is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Summons dismissed
  • Plaintiff to pay defendant's costs