Baars and Guerin

In the matter of *Baars and Guerin*, heard by Judge Middleton, the applicants sought to set aside a statutory demand. The core of the dispute concerned whether the applicants had a genuine dispute about the existence of the debt claimed in the statutory demand, or whether they had a counterclaim, set-off or cross-demand that would have had the effect of reducing the amount of the debt to less than the statutory minimum.

The court was required to determine whether the applicants had demonstrated a sufficient basis to establish a genuine dispute regarding the debt. Specifically, the court had to assess whether the evidence presented by the applicants raised a real question as to the existence of the debt, or whether their alleged counterclaim, set-off, or cross-demand was substantial enough to reduce the debt below the threshold for a statutory demand.

Judge Middleton dismissed the application, finding that the applicants had failed to establish a genuine dispute about the existence of the debt or a valid counterclaim, set-off, or cross-demand. The court concluded that the evidence did not support the applicants' assertions and that the debt, as claimed in the statutory demand, was not genuinely disputed. Consequently, the application to set aside the statutory demand was unsuccessful.