A creditor’s statutory demand is a formal written demand under section 459E of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) requiring a company to pay a debt within 21 days. It is not a court order and it is not an ordinary letter of demand. Ignoring it is serious: the company is then presumed insolvent and can be wound up.

The debt must exceed $4,000. This statutory minimum has applied since 1 July 2021, when it was permanently doubled from $2,000. If the debt is $4,000 or less — or falls to that level once genuine offsetting claims are taken into account — the demand can be set aside.

21 days from the day the demand is served. Within that period the company must both file an application to set the demand aside and serve it, with a supporting affidavit, on the creditor. Filing alone is not enough — service inside the 21 days is essential.

No. The 21-day period under section 459G is strict and the court has no power to extend it once it has expired. This is the most common and most damaging mistake made with statutory demands. If a demand arrives, get advice the same week it is served.

A genuine dispute is a real, arguable disagreement about whether the debt is owed. The court does not decide who is right — only whether there is a plausible contention that needs investigating. The threshold is low, but the dispute must be genuine and supported by evidence, not merely asserted.

An offsetting claim is a genuine counterclaim, set-off or cross-demand the company has against the creditor. It does not have to arise out of the same transaction. If the offsetting claim brings the debt down to $4,000 or less, the demand can be set aside, or the amount varied.

Yes, but generally only where the defect would cause substantial injustice — for example a materially misstated amount, a wrongly identified creditor, or a missing or non-compliant affidavit. Minor errors that mislead nobody will not be enough. A court can also set a demand aside for “some other reason”.

They can, but they should not. Issuing a statutory demand where there is a genuine dispute is an abuse of the process. The likely outcome is that the demand is set aside with a costs order against the creditor, sometimes on the indemnity basis, and the debt still has to be sued for in the ordinary way.

The company is presumed to be insolvent. The creditor can then apply to wind the company up, and that application must generally be made within three months after the compliance period ends. At the winding-up hearing the company cannot raise the dispute about the debt without the court’s leave.

Solvency evidence can rebut the presumption of insolvency at a winding-up hearing, but it is expensive, needs detailed and current financial evidence, and does not cure a missed set-aside deadline. It is a fallback, not a plan. Responding properly within 21 days is far cheaper.

AHPRA and the relevant National Board gather information, assess the risk to the public, and normally invite you to make a written submission. The Board can take no further action, caution you, impose conditions, accept an undertaking, or refer the matter to a tribunal. What you put in that first submission shapes everything that follows.

Yes. NSW is a co-regulatory jurisdiction. Complaints about registered health practitioners in NSW are handled by the Health Care Complaints Commission and the relevant NSW health professional council, supported by the Health Professional Councils Authority — not by AHPRA directly. The process, timeframes and review rights differ, so get NSW-specific advice.

Often yes. But the regulator can take immediate action — suspending your registration or imposing conditions — before any finding is made, if it believes there is a serious risk to the public. If that happens you usually have a short window to seek review or a stay, so respond urgently.

Immediate action is an interim protective step taken before a matter is finally decided — typically suspension, conditions on practice, or accepting an undertaking. It is not a finding of guilt. You are normally given a short opportunity to respond before it takes effect, and the decision can usually be reviewed by a tribunal.

Merits review means a tribunal stands in the shoes of the original decision-maker and decides the matter again — the facts, the law and any discretion — to reach the correct or preferable decision. It can consider new evidence. In NSW this is usually NCAT; at the federal level it is the Administrative Review Tribunal, which replaced the AAT in October 2024.

Judicial review asks whether the decision was made lawfully — was there power to make it, was the correct procedure followed, was there a legal error or a denial of procedural fairness. The court does not decide whether the decision was right. If judicial review succeeds, the decision is usually sent back to be made again.

It depends on the legislation and the type of decision, and some deadlines are as short as 28 days. The decision notice will normally state your review rights and the time limit. Read it the day it arrives — missing the deadline can end your rights entirely.

Sometimes. A stay may be available under the governing statute, but you have to apply for it and satisfy the relevant test — usually an arguable case, the balance of convenience, and the public interest. In health matters, protection of the public weighs heavily against granting a stay.

Often, particularly in health, technical and professional matters. Where the question is whether your conduct met accepted professional standards, evidence from a peer in the same field is usually essential. Expert evidence must be independent and comply with the tribunal’s expert witness code of conduct.

Yes, and often quickly. A condition or suspension on your registration can set off your employer’s own disciplinary process, and many contracts allow termination. You may also have to tell your professional indemnity insurer, other regulators, and employers in other states. Deal with all of that at the same time, not afterwards.

Usually yes, but appeal rights are narrower than review rights and are often limited to questions of law. There is a specific statutory pathway — for example an internal NCAT Appeal Panel and then the Supreme Court — and a strict deadline. Check the appeal route stated in the decision itself.