Austin Corp Pty Ltd v Blanford

In Austin Corp Pty Ltd v Blanford, the defendant, Blanford, sought to set aside a statutory demand issued by Austin Corp Pty Ltd, which was based on a judgment debt. The court was required to determine whether the statutory demand should be set aside and, if so, the appropriate costs orders, including whether to award indemnity costs against the defendant. The plaintiff alleged that Blanford had obtained a default judgment and served the statutory demand because Blanford was induced to believe that no action would be taken without the plaintiff's knowledge. The plaintiff also disputed the debt based on an alleged compromise agreement or the existence of a valid offsetting claim.

The court considered the relevant considerations in statutory demand proceedings, particularly where the grounds for setting aside the demand had not been adjudicated. The court noted that the plaintiff's failure to repay money under the alleged compromise agreement and to offer to pay the remainder of the debt into court from the outset had put the defendant to unnecessary expense in defending the application. The court found that the plaintiff had not established the alleged compromise agreement or the existence of a valid offsetting claim, and that the plaintiff's conduct in not offering to pay the remainder of the debt into court had been unreasonable.

The court determined that the statutory demand should be set aside and that the plaintiff should pay the defendant's costs. The court further found that the plaintiff's conduct warranted an award of indemnity costs against the plaintiff. The court held that the plaintiff's failure to repay money under the alleged compromise agreement and to offer to pay the remainder of the debt into court from the outset had put the defendant to unnecessary expense in defending the application, and that the plaintiff's conduct had been unreasonable. The court ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs on an indemnity basis.