Pendle Hill Development Pty Limited v McNeice [2013] NSWSC 756

Pendle Hill Development Pty Limited v McNeice [2013] NSWSC 756

The court found that certain invoices were genuinely disputed in whole or part and that the plaintiff owed only $14,435.00 of the amount claimed in the statutory demand. The statutory demand was therefore varied to that amount and extended for compliance; no order as to costs was made since each party succeeded partially.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Decision
Outcome
Statutory demand varied; no order as to costs
Legal Topics
['statutory Demand' 'debt Disputes' 'setting Aside Statutory Demand']
['corporations'] ['statutory Demand' 'debt Disputes' 'setting Aside Statutory Demand']

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 to Set Aside Statutory Demand / Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there is a genuine dispute regarding the debts claimed in the statutory demand against the plaintiff' 'Whether invoices included in the statutory demand are properly payable by the plaintiff' 'Quantum of the amounts claimed in various invoices']

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that certain invoices were genuinely disputed in whole or part and that the plaintiff owed only $14,435.00 of the amount claimed in the statutory demand. The statutory demand was therefore varied to that amount and extended for compliance; no order as to costs was made since each party succeeded partially.

Court Disposition

Statutory demand varied; no order as to costs

Orders

  • ['Statutory demand dated 5 April 2012 varied to $14,435.00' 'Statutory demand to have effect as varied from 12 April 2012' 'Time for compliance with the statutory demand extended by 21 days from the date of judgment' 'No order as to costs']