Graywinter Properties Pty Limited v Gas and Fuel Corporation Superannuation Fund

EX TEMPORE Judgment 1HIS HONOUR: This is an application under s 459G of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to set aside a statutory demand dated 23 June 2011 under which the defendant demanded from the plaintiff £ 52,333.08. 2The plaintiff's evidence establishes that in about 2003 the plaintiff was engaged by CQS Limited (CQS) of London to provide information and research services. The plaintiff in turn sub-contracted the defendant to provide those services to CQS on the plaintiff's behalf. CQS paid the plaintiff and the plaintiff paid the defendant 3The demand incorporates a schedule describing the debt. It is made up of a series of discrete amounts asserted to be payable by the plaintiff to the defendant pursuant to identified written agreements (all of which pre-dated February 2008) for the services of two named individuals over specific identified periods. 4The present application is supported by a brief affidavit by the plaintiff's director, Mr J.R. Harker-Mortlock. The affidavit deposes to the fact that both the contract between CQS and the plaintiff and the contract between the plaintiff and the defendant were terminated on 1 February 2008. 5Mr Harker-Mortlock goes on to state that the plaintiff's manager, David Wilson, left the plaintiff's employ at the end of January 2008 and was, therefore, not in a position to approve or contract between the plaintiff and the defendant. 6The affidavit goes on to state as follows: 11. The Defendant's Creditor claims for debts which were never authorised by the Plaintiff or incurred by the Plaintiff. 12. This dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant has been documented over the past three years. The Plaintiff engaged solicitors in London who wrote to the Defendant advising that the debt was disputed. 13. The Plaintiff also wrote directly to the Defendant advising that the debt was disputed. Annexed and marked "B" are copies of some items of correspondence between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. 7The correspondence referred to is two letters. The first is a letter dated 20 June 2008 from the plaintiff's English solicitors to the defendant in the following terms: We refer to the outstanding invoices supported by the authorised timesheet provided by you with your letter of 5 June 2008: