The Blog that follows Global Economics, Finance and the Laws and Regulations that govern global markets. By Zach Bell
Saturday, October 20, 2012
Challenging a Statutory Demand in New South Wales
What is a statutory demand and what is its significance?
- It represents the creditors commencement of a winding up order against a debtor.
- The statutory demand must require the company to pay the amount of debt within 21 days after the demand is served on the company (see: s459E(2)c). The demand must also provide an attached affidavit.
- If the company fails to comply with the demand, then the creditor may apply to the Court to wind that company up in insolvency (see: s459Q).
How can a debtor challenge a statutory demand?
- The company may apply to set aside a statutory demand within 21 days of the demand being served on them. The grounds to set aside are as follows:
1.There must be a genuine dispute between the parties about the existence or the amount of the debt,
to which the demand relates (see: s459H(1)a).
2. That the company has a claim offsetting that outstanding amount (see: 459H(1)b). An offsetting
claim means a "genuine counter claim or cross demand against the creditor" (even if it does not
arise out of the same transaction or circumstances as a debt to which the demand relates).
How to set aside a demand on other grounds?
- If there is a defect in the demand.
- Substantial injustice will be caused unless the demand is set aside
- There is some other reason why the demand should be set aside.
Order subject to the conditions
- Respondent may also ask the Court to make an Order subject to the conditions (see: 459M).
Costs
- Where the respondent wins and the demand is set aside the Court may order that person making the demand to pay the Companies costs in relation to the application.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
The changing world order
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Why is the AUD declining?
Monday, June 6, 2011
Quantitative Easing could mark the beginning of the end for the USD
This chart perhaps shows the beginning of the end for the USD.


Tuesday, March 1, 2011
India's population growth
Liability of Airlines for recklessness
Qantas Ltd as an example has had a string of commercial accidents since it was floated on to the market in 1997. In the scenario that an airline suffers fatalities (deaths), which are attributed to by its maintenance, could the airline itself and its Directors be criminally liable under the Commonwealth Criminal Code.
In the scenario that an airline suffers a casualty the company and the Board of Directors could be criminally liable for cutting maintenance, so long as it was sufficiently connected to the fatalities. In this case the Court is empowered to make a finding of recklessness and order a fine on the company and prosecute the Directors individually. Under the Commonwealth Criminal Code at 5.4 (1)(a) a finding of recklessness will be made in the situation where a Director is aware of a substantial risk of death or injury and that the circumstances exist and that it was unjustifiable to take the risk, and the company takes the risk anyway.