According to ASIC insolvency data, there were 2,975 building companies that entered external administration in 2023-24, representing some 27% of all insolvencies.
The collapse of Porter Davis on 31 March 2023, left some 1,700 homeowners across Queensland and Victoria having to deal with the fallout.
These are extremely sobering figures. The reality for homeowners is that they are often left dealing with liquidators without many options and faced with substantial losses.
What can you do if you suspect your builder is facing financial difficulty?
The Federal Court of Australia recently handed down a landmark judgment against a third party adviser for devising an asset-stripping scheme and breaching the creditor-defeating disposition provisions of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
Chris Pearce, Blackwall Legal LLP
This is an extract from the 2025 edition of GRR's The Asia-Pacific Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
This is an Insight article, written by a selected partner as part of GRR's co-published content. Read more on Insight
In summary
This week’s TGIF considers a recent decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Forex Capital Trading Pty Ltd (in liquidation) v Invesus Group Limited [2024] NSWSC 867). Justice Ball determined that admission of a proof of debt by a liquidator was not akin to a judgment or settlement, and that such an admission did not create a new liability of the company.
Ligon 158 Pty Ltd v Shield Holdings Australia Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 144
A recent decision of the Federal Court of Australia has confirmed the Court’s power to make an order suspending limitation periods applicable to claims against a deregistered company when ordering its reinstatement under s 601AH of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (the Act).
The Alita matter serves as a good illustration that if you intend to seek leave under section 444GA(1)(b) you should act swiftly and with regard to the potential regulatory risk.
With the mass of reports, reviews and consultations that have already occurred, there is no lack of critiques, complaints and proposed solutions. The risk is that these will (once again) be cherrypicked for fixes, rather than form the basis for a comprehensive review.
It has been 33 years since the "recession we had to have" in 1991. Fears that Australia would enter a technical recession during 2023 didn’t eventuate.
In my December 2022 article, I predicted that when insolvencies started to surge in the Australian economy, the worst casualties would likely be in construction.1 It’s taken a while for my predicted post-COVID day of reckoning to arrive in Australia. But it is here.
A creditors' scheme of arrangement ("Scheme") can be a powerful restructuring tool implemented to achieve a variety of outcomes for a business, ranging from deleveraging or a debt-to-equity conversion to a merger and/or issue of new debt/equity instruments. When managed appropriately, a Scheme can reshape a business' debt and equity profile, setting it up for an improved go-forward operating platform. Below we set out an outline of the Scheme process in Australia and consider some key features that are unique to Australian schemes.
Section 90-15(1) of the Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations) (Cth) (IPSC) provides that the court may make such orders as it thinks fit in relation to the external administration of a company. It’s well recognised the broad power under that section extends to the making of judicial directions on the application of insolvency practitioners under section 90-20(1)(d) of the IPSC.
When to seek a judicial direction