Pacific Islands Express Pty Ltd v Empire Building Development Pty Ltd [2008] NSWSC 576

Pacific Islands Express Pty Ltd v Empire Building Development Pty Ltd [2008] NSWSC 576

The plaintiff's supporting affidavit did not satisfy the requirements of s 459G(3)(a) and the Graywinter principle, as it failed to sufficiently delineate the nature of the dispute or the basis for resisting the demand. As a result, the application did not comply with statutory requirements and was dismissed. The power to extend the period for compliance with the statutory demand was not enlivened, as there was no valid application in accordance with s 459G.

Parties
Plaintiff: Pacific Islands Express Pty Ltd; Defendant: Empire Building Developments Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Originating Process / Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand And/or Extend Period for Compliance
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Winding Up in Insolvency, Statutory Demand, Graywinter Principle, Affidavit Requirements, Security of Payment
Corporations Equity Winding Up in Insolvency Statutory Demand Graywinter Principle Affidavit Requirements Security of Payment

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pacific Islands Express Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

Empire Building Developments Pty Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Process / Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand And/or Extend Period for Compliance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the affidavit supporting the application to set aside the statutory demand satisfies the requirements of s 459G(3)(a) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and the Graywinter principle
  2. 2 Whether the Court can extend the period for compliance with the demand under s 459F(2)(a)(i)

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's supporting affidavit did not satisfy the requirements of s 459G(3)(a) and the Graywinter principle, as it failed to sufficiently delineate the nature of the dispute or the basis for resisting the demand. As a result, the application did not comply with statutory requirements and was dismissed. The power to extend the period for compliance with the statutory demand was not enlivened, as there was no valid application in accordance with s 459G.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Originating process dismissed with costs.