In the matter of Bevic Holdings Pty Limited

Bevic Holdings Pty Limited applied to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia to set aside a statutory demand made by a creditor. The demand sought payment of a debt, and the dispute centred on whether there was a genuine dispute as to the existence or amount of the debt. Additionally, the company argued for setting aside the demand on the basis of an agreement, undertaking, or estoppel, without providing evidence to substantiate the claim.

The court had to determine whether a genuine dispute existed regarding the debt, and if so, whether there were other reasons to set aside the statutory demand. The onus of proof lay on the company to demonstrate the existence of such a dispute. The court noted the analogy with applications for summary judgment, where the defendant's knowledge of the debt was limited. Furthermore, the court examined whether there was an agreement, undertaking, or estoppel that could justify setting aside the demand, but found that the company had failed to provide any evidence supporting these claims.

The court concluded that while there was a genuine dispute up until the service of the affidavit, it was not justifiable to contest the proceedings after that point. The company had also unsuccessfully sought to adduce expert evidence, which further complicated the case. Given these factors, the court decided not to make an order regarding costs. The reasoning was that the dispute was genuine until the affidavit was served, but the subsequent actions taken by the company were not justified.