This article was first published in Kott Gunning's
Insolvency Case Note of 17 April 2013.
Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Garuda Aviation Pty
Ltd[2013] WASCA 61
Rohanna Pty Ltd v Nu-Steel Homes Adelaide Pty
Ltd[2013] WASC 109
During the last 18 months, there has been significant
uncertainly about whether or not a statutory demand is valid when
issued in relation to a portion of a debt.
In 2011, the South Australian case of Candetti Constructions Pty
Ltd v M & I Samaras (No 1) Pty Ltd determined that a statutory
demand for only part of a debt was invalid, even if that part was
undisputed. In April last year, Master Sanderson of the Supreme
Court of Western Australia reluctantly found that he was bound to
follow that South Australian Judge's view when he set aside the
Commonwealth Bank's statutory demand for an undisputed portion
of a debt in Garuda Aviation Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of
Australia.
