Pre-existing disputes over performance, delay, quality and...

Pre-existing disputes over performance, delay, quality and termination of work orders defeated admission under Section 9, because repeated correspondence before the demand notice showed a real controversy that could not be resolved in insolvency proceedings. The Tribunal held that the workmanlike completion obligation was missed, the defects were disputed, and the resulting liability involved contested facts unsuitable for summary determination. It further held that even if the contract had been frustrated or breached due to lack of permission, the remedy would be a claim for unliquidated damages triable by a civil court, not an operational debt enforceable in insolvency. The dismissal of the Section 9 application was therefore sustained.