Burdon Pty Ltd v Gillford Pty Ltd

Burdon Pty Ltd brought proceedings against Gillford Pty Ltd in the Supreme Court of Queensland, challenging a statutory demand that was issued by Gillford under section 459P of the Corporations Act 2001. The primary dispute centred around whether there was a genuine dispute over the existence or amount of the debt claimed, which was crucial in determining the validity of the statutory demand. The case also involved issues regarding the admissibility of expert evidence in establishing the existence and amount of the debt.

The court had to address whether a genuine dispute existed between the parties concerning the debt, and if so, whether this dispute warranted the setting aside of the statutory demand. Additionally, the court examined the admissibility of expert evidence provided by both parties. The analysis involved assessing whether the expert evidence was reliable and whether it was relevant to the determination of the dispute.

The Supreme Court determined that a genuine dispute did exist concerning the amount of the debt, primarily due to the differing interpretations of contractual obligations and related financial documentation. The court found that the evidence provided by the experts was not sufficient to conclusively determine the amount of the debt, and thus, the statutory demand should be set aside. The court also ruled that certain evidence was inadmissible as it was based on assumptions that were not adequately supported by the factual basis provided.

As a result, the court ordered that the statutory demand issued by Gillford Pty Ltd be set aside, and it made no order as to costs. This decision underscores the importance of a clear and substantiated basis for expert evidence in such disputes and reinforces the principle that genuine disputes over debts can lead to the setting aside of statutory demands.