Fortrus Pty Ltd v Barraigh Pty Ltd; Fortrus Pty Ltd v Mosman Services Pty Ltd

The case before the court involved two separate proceedings between Fortrus Pty Ltd and Barraigh Pty Ltd, and between Fortrus Pty Ltd and Mosman Services Pty Ltd. The dispute centred on statutory demands for payment, and subsequent applications to set aside these demands on the basis of a genuine dispute regarding the debt. The court was required to determine whether the applicants had a genuine dispute concerning the debt claimed in the statutory demands.

The legal issues before the court were multifaceted. The first issue was whether the deponent of the affidavit filed in support of the application to set aside the statutory demand was appropriately connected to the applicant company. The second issue was whether there was sufficient evidence to establish that the payment of the debt was conditional on the payment of a debt to another company associated with the deponent. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the consultancy agreement between Fortrus Pty Ltd and the respondents was still in effect at the time the statutory demand was issued, and whether any services were actually performed under this agreement.

The court found that the deponent of the affidavit was not a director, employee, or agent of the applicant company, and therefore lacked the authority to raise a dispute on behalf of the applicant regarding the conditional payment of the debt. Furthermore, the court determined that there was no evidence in the affidavit to connect the applicant with the condition of the debt being disputed. Regarding the consultancy agreement, the court concluded that the agreement was entered into after the services it was meant to cover had already been provided, and there was no evidence to suggest that the applicant had requested or received the services from the respondents. Consequently, the court found that there was no genuine dispute concerning the debt.

As a result of these findings, the court set aside the statutory demand in each proceeding, effectively dismissing the applications to set aside the demands on the basis that no genuine dispute was established.