Charlie Tassone and Patricia Tassone v Classic Manufacturing (Aust) Pty Ltd

In the matter of *Charlie Tassone and Patricia Tassone v Classic Manufacturing (Aust) Pty Ltd*, heard before Vija Zars in the Supreme Court of Victoria, the applicants, Charlie and Patricia Tassone, sought to set aside a statutory demand issued by the respondent, Classic Manufacturing (Aust) Pty Ltd. The core of the dispute concerned whether the Tassones had a genuine dispute regarding the existence of the debt claimed in the statutory demand, or if they had a counterclaim, set-off, or cross-demand that would have entitled them to an order setting aside the demand.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Tassones had demonstrated a "genuine dispute" as to the existence of the debt, or a valid counterclaim, set-off, or cross-demand, sufficient to warrant setting aside the statutory demand pursuant to section 459H of the *Corporations Act 2001* (Cth). This required the Court to assess the substance of the Tassones' objections to the debt and determine if they raised issues that were not merely vexatious or frivolous, but rather arguable and capable of giving rise to a real question to be tried.

Justice Zars considered the evidence presented by both parties, including correspondence and contractual documents. The Court applied the principles established in cases concerning statutory demands, which require a respondent to show a substantial and arguable case for setting aside the demand. The Court found that the Tassones had failed to establish a genuine dispute or a valid counterclaim that met the threshold required by section 459H. Their assertions were found to be unsubstantiated and lacking in sufficient particularity to raise a real question as to the existence of the debt.

Consequently, the Court dismissed the application to set aside the statutory demand.