Neffati v Aravanis and Roy as Trustees of the Property of Neffati

The applicant, Mr Neffati, sought to set aside a statutory demand issued by the respondents, Mr Aravanis and Mr Roy, in their capacity as trustees of the property of Mr Neffati. The dispute concerned whether Mr Neffati had a genuine dispute regarding the debt claimed in the statutory demand.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Mr Neffati had established a sufficient basis to demonstrate a "genuine dispute" as to the existence or amount of the debt, thereby entitling him to have the statutory demand set aside. This required the court to consider the nature and quality of the evidence presented by Mr Neffati in support of his claim of a dispute.

Judge Baird found that Mr Neffati had failed to demonstrate a genuine dispute. The court applied the principles established in cases such as *Sons of Gwalia Ltd v Australian Securities and Investments Commission* [2007] HCA 16, which require a party seeking to set aside a statutory demand to show that the dispute is substantial and not merely a sham or vexatious. The court was not satisfied that the evidence presented by Mr Neffati met this threshold, noting that the alleged grounds for dispute were vague and unsubstantiated.

Consequently, the court dismissed Mr Neffati's application to set aside the statutory demand.