Continental Ace Pty Ltd, Ex parte McIntyre

This matter concerned an application by Continental Ace Pty Ltd, ex parte McIntyre, before Kirby J in chambers. The applicant sought an order under s 109 of the *Bankruptcy Act 1966* (Cth) to set aside a statutory demand issued by a creditor. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant had a "genuine dispute" regarding the debt claimed in the statutory demand, as required by the Act to justify setting it aside.

The primary legal issue before the Court was to determine whether the applicant had established a sufficient basis to demonstrate a "genuine dispute" concerning the debt. This required an assessment of the evidence presented by the applicant to ascertain if it raised a real question as to the existence or amount of the debt, rather than a mere assertion of dispute. The Court had to consider the threshold for establishing such a dispute in the context of an application to set aside a statutory demand.

Kirby J applied the principles established in cases such as *Hale v. A.B.N. Amro Australia Ltd* and *Southern Cross Commodities Pty Ltd v. Euromac Pty Ltd*, which clarify that a genuine dispute requires a substantial question of fact or law that is not frivolous or vexatious. The Court found that the applicant had failed to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate its claims of a dispute, particularly concerning alleged set-offs and counterclaims. The evidence presented was deemed insufficient to raise a real question as to the existence or amount of the debt, falling short of the required threshold for a genuine dispute.

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