SV Steel Supplies Pty Ltd v Palwizat

In the Federal Court of Australia, SV Steel Supplies Pty Ltd sought to set aside a statutory demand issued by Palwizat. The statutory demand was a formal demand for payment of a debt, which if not paid within 21 days, could lead to the applicant being deemed to be insolvent. SV Steel Supplies contended that the statutory demand was not validly served, as it was left at their registered office while it was closed, and there was a notice on the door indicating that it was closed for more than two weeks. SV Steel Supplies argued that the statutory demand was not effectively served until they became aware of it, which was outside the 21-day period in which they had to respond.

The legal issue before the court was whether the statutory demand was validly served and if the application to set aside was within the required time frame. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the statutory demand was served when it was left at the registered office, or whether it was not effectively served until SV Steel Supplies became aware of it. The court considered whether the notice of closure on the door of the registered office, coupled with the length of the closure, meant that the statutory demand was not validly served.

The court found that the statutory demand was effectively served when it was left at the registered office, despite the office being closed. The court held that the notice of closure did not affect the validity of the service, and the statutory demand was deemed to be served when it was left at the premises. The court further held that the application to set aside the statutory demand was out of time, as it was not made within the required 21 days of the service of the statutory demand. The court dismissed the application with costs to be assessed.