In the matter of UGL Process Solutions Pty Ltd [2012] NSWSC 1256
The inclusion in the statutory demand of amounts not due and amounts genuinely in dispute constituted a defect causing substantial injustice and was inconsistent with the proper use of the statutory regime. The statutory demand was set aside under ss 459H and 459J of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
Source-derived case information.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 18 October 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Corporations Statutory Demand / Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand; Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Statutory demand set aside; defendant to pay plaintiff's costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['winding Up' 'statutory Demand' 'setting Aside Statutory Demand' 'genuine Dispute' 'defect in Statutory Demand' 'abuse of Process']
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Corporations Statutory Demand / Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand; Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether a genuine dispute exists about the debt the subject of a statutory demand' 'Whether there is a defect in the statutory demand causing substantial injustice' 'Whether there is some other reason to set aside the statutory demand']
Ratio Decidendi
The inclusion in the statutory demand of amounts not due and amounts genuinely in dispute constituted a defect causing substantial injustice and was inconsistent with the proper use of the statutory regime. The statutory demand was set aside under ss 459H and 459J of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
Court Disposition
Statutory demand set aside; defendant to pay plaintiff's costs.
Orders
- ["The Defendant's statutory demand dated 12 July 2012 be set aside." "The Defendant pay the Plaintiff's costs as agreed or assessed."]
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment