Kanakaridis v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited and Hou v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited

In *Kanakaridis v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited* and *Hou v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited*, the Federal Court of Australia considered applications to set aside bankruptcy notices issued by Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited. The applicants, Mr. Kanakaridis and Mr. Hou, sought to challenge the validity of these notices.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the bankruptcy notices should be set aside on the grounds that there was a "counterclaim, set-off or cross-demand" that had not been satisfied, pursuant to section 41(1) of the *Bankruptcy Act 1966* (Cth). This required the Court to determine if the applicants had established a sufficient basis for such a claim that, if proven, would have exceeded the amount of the debt stated in the bankruptcy notice.

Judge Cameron reasoned that to succeed in setting aside a bankruptcy notice on this ground, the applicant must demonstrate that the alleged counterclaim, set-off, or cross-demand is genuine and has not been raised or considered in previous proceedings. The Court found that neither applicant had provided sufficient evidence to establish the existence of a genuine and substantial counterclaim, set-off, or cross-demand that would have prevented them from paying the debt. The applications were therefore dismissed.