CLIFFORD v The Trustee for Healthy Hearing and Balance Care Trading as Healthy Hearing and Balance Care

In *Clifford v The Trustee for Healthy Hearing and Balance Care Trading as Healthy Hearing and Balance Care*, the applicant, Mr Clifford, sought to set aside a statutory demand issued by the respondent, the Trustee for Healthy Hearing and Balance Care. The dispute centred on whether Mr Clifford owed the debt claimed in the statutory demand, which arose from an alleged breach of a settlement agreement. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether Mr Clifford had established grounds to set aside the statutory demand. This required the Court to determine whether there was a genuine dispute about the existence of the debt, or whether Mr Clifford had a counterclaim, set-off or claim for an amount equal to or exceeding the amount of the debt. The Court also considered whether Mr Clifford had failed to comply with the requirements of the statutory demand.

Judge Altobelli found that Mr Clifford had failed to demonstrate a genuine dispute regarding the debt. The Court noted that the settlement agreement clearly stipulated the payment obligations, and Mr Clifford's assertions of non-performance by the respondent were unsubstantiated and did not amount to a genuine dispute about the debt itself. Furthermore, the Court found that Mr Clifford had not established any valid counterclaim or set-off that would satisfy the threshold for setting aside the demand. The Court also found that Mr Clifford had not complied with the requirements of the statutory demand, specifically regarding the timeframe for responding.

Consequently, the Court dismissed Mr Clifford's application to set aside the statutory demand and ordered that he pay the respondent's costs.