Sheslow v Diamond Rose NL [2005] NSWSC 492

Sheslow v Diamond Rose NL [2005] NSWSC 492

The demand served by the plaintiff did not constitute a statutory demand under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) due to fundamental deficiencies of form and failure to refer to the correct statutory provision. Even if it had been a statutory demand, it had been served outside the three-month period prescribed by s.459C(2)(a), so no presumption of insolvency could arise. The application was therefore dismissed.

Parties
Plaintiff: Richard Myron Sheslow; Defendant: Diamond Rose NL
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Winding Up Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Winding Up Applications, Statutory Demand, Insolvency

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

Parties

Richard Myron Sheslow

Plaintiff

Diamond Rose NL

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Winding Up Application / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the demand served by the plaintiff constitutes a statutory demand under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether failure to comply with the demand gives rise to a presumption of insolvency under s.459C(2)(a) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)

Ratio Decidendi

The demand served by the plaintiff did not constitute a statutory demand under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) due to fundamental deficiencies of form and failure to refer to the correct statutory provision. Even if it had been a statutory demand, it had been served outside the three-month period prescribed by s.459C(2)(a), so no presumption of insolvency could arise. The application was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Winding up application dismissed
  • Plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs of the proceedings