Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 25 APRIL 2012

Costly Consequences of not taking Genuine Steps under CDR Act

Parties to disputes and the lawyers acting for them should pay close attention to their obligations under the CDR Act.

AustraliaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

IN BRIEF

A recent decision of the Federal Court of Australia signals the importance of parties to disputes and their legal representatives complying with their obligations under the Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011 (Cth) (CDR Act).

THE CASE

The decision, Superior IP International Pty Ltd v Ahearn Fox Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys [2012] FCA 282, was handed down by Justice Reeves of the Federal Court of Australia on 23 March 2012.

The case concerned an application under section 459G of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to set aside a statutory demand on the basis that there was a genuine dispute between the parties regarding the existence of the debt to which the demand related.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from