In Thomson v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited [2024] QCA 73, involved two main appeals centred on a statutory demand served by Thomson demanding a sum of $2,832,378. The crux of the disputes included whether a genuine debt dispute existed and issues surrounding apprehended bias and procedural fairness.
The Court, composed of Justices Mullins P, Morrison, and Bond, examined the multiple grounds of appeal presented. Ultimately, the Court allowed partial amendments to the notice of appeal but firmly refused applications for new evidence. Both appeals, identified under Appeal No 3513 of 2022 and Appeal No 4341 of 2022, were dismissed with costs awarded against the appellant.
This decision not only reinforces the criteria under sections 459G and 459H of the Corporations Act 2001 and related Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) for setting aside statutory demands but also clarifies the high threshold for establishing apprehended bias and the limited instances where an appellate court will interfere with the discretion exercised by a primary judge regarding procedural matters and evidence.