Acceptance procedure

Thank you for your interest in LAWorld. The application process can take between 4-8 weeks and the procedure for joining is as follows:

  • Once you have read the Membership Application Documents and wish to initiate an application for membership, please complete and return the LAWorld Application Form to us. There is no cost or obligation at this stage.
  • Upon receipt of this application form at our Executive Office it is circulated to the LAWorld Committee and the Chair, who are Principal Partners of LAWorld member firms. There is one Committee member for each LAWorld region – Europe, Asia Pacific, Middle East and Africa, North America and Latin America. Our current Chair is Steve Ng, Managing Partner of Ng & Shum, with offices in Hong Kong and mainland China.
  • The Committee will decide if they have any questions at this stage or if references are to be taken. If so, the Executive Director, Mrs Jacqui Nash, will email you to seek permission to approach the independent references you have provided in your application form.
  • If you have been referred to us by another LAWorld member, we will take a reference from them.
  • After the references have been reviewed by the Committee, it will decide if your application should be recommended to the entire membership. If so, your application will be circulated to our membership with a deadline for their comments.
  • The decision of the members is notified a couple of weeks later.
  • We will keep in regular contact with you during the application process

LAWorld News

Specificity in Statutory Demands - Australia

For many creditors, issuing a creditor’s statutory demand pursuant to section 459E of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the Act) against a debtor company is now commonplace. 

However, creditors cannot afford to be nonchalant about their use and preparation of statutory demands, as a failure to prepare properly may result in the demand being set aside. In particular, creditors must ensure that the debt, the subject of the demand, is articulated clearly. 

In many instances, the nature of the debt may be simple, and creditors will easily fulfil their obligations of clarity. However, creditors with more complex factual scenarios may not enjoy the same effortless approach. 

The Principles 

The threshold for sufficiency of description is expressed well in LSI Australia v LSI Holdings; LSI Australia v LSI Consulting [2007] NSWSC 1406, where Austin J held that the description of the debt: (a) must allow a reasonable person, in the shoes of a director of the debtor company, 

(b) to identify the general nature of the debt to a sufficient degree; such that 

(c) the director can assess whether there is a genuine dispute as to the debt (including an offsetting claim) or a defect in the demand. 

The Court’s Approach 

Robb J in the Supreme Court of NSW case In the matter of Oakdale Queensland Pty Limited; In the matter of HLHG Pty Limited; In the matter of ABN 163 546 852 Pty Ltd; In the matter of ABN 163 772 601 Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 1958 (Oakdale) considered the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation’s description of a debt, articulated essentially as an RBA deficit and being, in substance, a compilation of various debts, incurred for various reasons, statutorily bundled together and described as a single debt. 

Whilst in Oakdale his Honour ultimately found that the description of debt was sufficient in the circumstances, a word of warning was issued to those, including the Deputy Commissioner, who might fail to specify debts adequately in statutory demands. 

Of more recent history are the scathing comments of Wigney J, who described a demand with a ‘fairly generic description’ as being ‘vague and ambiguous and therefore defective…deficient…and potentially misleading’ (Wollongong Coal Limited v Gujarat NRE India Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 221). In that case, the demand was set aside with the petitioning creditor (defendant) ordered to pay the costs of the demand recipient (plaintiff), His Honour opining that the recipient had been placed in a position of unfairness. 

Outcome & Next Steps 

Aside from the additional time and costs inherent in responding to an application to set aside a statutory demand, creditors who are ultimately unsuccessful in defending such proceedings may find themselves, ironically, faced with a costs order in favour of the very company from which they are seeking payment.

Polczynski Lawyers in Sydney, Australia can assist creditors by issuing statutory demands and commencing proceedings to recover debts owed. For companies that have received a statutory demand, about which there is a genuine dispute, offsetting claim, defect or some other reason to set the demand aside, Polczynski Lawyers can advise and, if appropriate, make an application pursuant to section 459G of the Act to set aside the demand.

Business News

Wall Street rebounds to close higher after jobs report
Fri, 06 May 2016 16:05:54 -0400
NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. stocks rebounded from early losses to close higher on Friday as investors ...
Sumner Redstone's defiance gets judge's attention at trial
Fri, 06 May 2016 15:52:02 -0400
(Note language in third paragraph some readers may find offensive.) ...
FCC confirms approval of Charter, Time Warner Cable merger
Fri, 06 May 2016 16:15:10 -0400
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Federal Communications Commission confirmed on Friday that it had vo...
Wall Street gives up on June rate hike by Fed after payrolls disappoint: poll
Fri, 06 May 2016 15:50:10 -0400
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wall Street's top banks have all but abandoned any expectation that the Federal...

Upcoming Events

Europe/Middle East Regional Meeting and Lawyers Next Generation (Budapest) from 5pm on Friday the 16th of September, 2016 to 5pm on Saturday the 17th of September, 2016

See All Events