Australia: High Court clarifies challenging security of payment scheme adjudications


Across two unanimous decisions, the High Court has provided much needed clarity for two aspects of the Security of Payment scheme in New South Wales and South Australia (SOP Scheme). In Probuild Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd v Shade Systems Pty Ltd [2018] HCA 4, the High Court confirmed that courts do not have jurisdiction to quash adjudication determinations for non-jurisdictional errors of law on the face of the record. Separately, in Maxcon Constructions Pty Ltd v Vadasz [2018] HCA 5, the High Court provided a clear warning to head contractors to structure their performance security requirements carefully lest they be considered "pay when paid" provisions.

Focusing on Probuild, while the decision confirms the status quo in New South Wales, a deeper understanding of the High Court's reasoning highlights potential national challenges ahead.


By denying judicial review for non-jurisdictional errors of law, the High Court confirms the SOP Scheme as an "[interim,] speedy and effective means of ensuring cash flow to builders from the parties with whom they contract". (Probuild quoting R J Neller Building Pty ltd v Ainsworth [2009] 1 Qd R 390 400–401 [39].)

In Probuild, the non-jurisdictional error of law centred on alleged errors made by the adjudicator in interpreting the liquidated damages provisions of the construction contract.

At first instance, the primary judge considered that the SOP Scheme did not exclude judicial review for non-jurisdictional errors of law. This position was out of step with previous courts' interpretation of the SOP Scheme and was subsequently overturned by the Court of Appeal before special leave to appeal to the High Court was granted.

The core argument made by the appellant was that, in absence of "clear words" in the statute, or a clear legislative intention to oust the jurisdiction, it was open for courts to quash adjudication determinations for non-jurisdictional errors of law (Probuild 9 [25]). The High Court unanimously found that the clear legislative intention did exist.

This interpretation of the SOP Scheme was supported on several bases:

  • the unique form of adjudication established by the SOP Scheme
  • the limited timeframes for adjudication under the SOP Scheme
  • the informal nature of adjudication under the SOP Scheme, and
  • the lack of appeal rights from an adjudication determination (Ibid 12–16 [35]–[43].)

The High Court stated that:

[t]o permit potentially costly and time-consuming judicial review proceedings to be brought on the basis of error of law on the face of the record, regardless of whether an adjudicator had exceeded the limits of their statutory functions and powers, would frustrate the operation and evident purposes of the statutory scheme. (Ibid 17 [48].)

A further factor underpinning the High Court's decision was that adjudication determinations only constitute an interim determination of the parties' respective rights and obligations under the construction contract. The SOP Scheme does not prevent disputes being resolved through civil proceedings under the construction contract. The High Court considered this to be the appropriate mechanism for resolving errors of law made by an adjudicator. Of course, recovering any overpayment will likely have severe time and cost implications for a party. While the High Court recognised these risks, they were considered a natural consequence of the SOP Scheme. (Ibid 18–19 [51].)

While Probuild settles the position in New South Wales (and, as will be seen, in South Australia), the question becomes whether the decision will have wider national implications. This is of particular importance for Victoria, as judicial review for non-jurisdictional error of law on the face of the record has been available for some time. (See, eg, Amaysa Enterprises Pty Ltd v Asta Developments (Aust) Pty Ltd [2015] VSC 233, [37], referring to Hickory v Schiavello (2009) 26 VR 112.) Given that the High Court's reasoning in Probuild focused on the legislative intent of the SOP Scheme, it would seem that Victoria, with a legislative scheme similar to New South Wales, may be bound to adopt the same approach.


Maxcon also contained issues of quashing adjudication determinations for non-jurisdictional errors of law. As the relevant provisions were not materially different, the High Court held that the provisions of the South Australian SOP Scheme, like those in New South Wales, ousted judicial review for non-jurisdictional error of law on the face of the record. (Maxcon 2 [5].) The substantial part of the decision, however, focused on potential "pay when paid" provisions in a subcontract.

While it is common practice for contractors to "pass down" obligations under a head contract in their contracts with subcontractors, care should be taken to ensure that this "pass down" does not cross the line imposed by the SOP Scheme and become a "pay when paid" provision.

In Maxcon, the subcontract provided that the subcontractor's performance security (cash retention equal to 5% of the contract sum) would be returned in two stages:

  • 50% – 90 days "after CFO is achieved", and
  • 50% – 365 days "after date of CFO" (Maxcon 2–3 [8].)

"CFO" was defined as:

the certificate of occupancy and any other Approval(s) required under Building Legislation which are required to enable the Works lawfully to be used for their respective purposes in accordance with [Maxcon's] Project Requirements. (Ibid 5–6 [19].)

Most Australian SOP Schemes define a "pay when paid" provision as one that makes a party's liability to pay or the due date for payment contingent or dependent on:

  • payment by a third party
  • the date on which a payment is made by a third party, or
  • the operation of another contract*

At adjudication, the adjudicator accepted a submission that the performance security provisions in the subcontract amounted to a "pay when paid" provision and were inoperative under the SOP Scheme.

The High Court agreed, holding that:

[as the] certificate of occupancy was dependent on certification by the builder, Maxcon, that the building work had been performed in accordance with the issued documents, including the head contract...the due dates for payment of the retention sum were dependent on something unrelated to [the subcontractor's] performance. (Maxcon 7 [24] –[25].)

As a result, the return of performance security provisions amounted to the third type of "pay when paid" provisions.

Interestingly, the High Court did not discuss the ultimate effect of a declaration that the return of performance security was an inoperative "paid when paid" provision. Many construction contracts contain a provision severing any clauses that are later found to be void or inoperative. If the relevant provisions were automatically severed, the question becomes "when would a head contractor's entitlement to the retention moneys cease?" There is no clear answer to this question. It may be that the effect is similar to the Peak principle for principal caused acts of prevention (see Peak Constructions (Liverpool) Ltd v McKinney Foundation Ltd (1970) 1 BLR 111), with a head contractor having to return the security within an unspecified "reasonable" time, but the issue appears yet to be determinatively resolved.

* See, eg, Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) section 12(2); Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 (Vic) section 13(2); Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld) section 16(2). Note that in the Northern Territory and Western Australia, a "pay when paid" provision is limited to only provisions that make the liability of a party (Party A) contingent (whether directly or indirectly) on Party A being paid an amount by another person (whether or not a party). See Construction Contracts (Security of Payments) Act (NT) section 12, Construction Contracts Act 2004 (WA) section 9.


While the debate over non-jurisdictional errors of law appears to have ended for now, a recent decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales has raised a potentially novel new method to challenge adjudication determinations.

In Bouygues Construction Australia Pty Ltd v Southern Cross Electrical Engineering [2017] NSWSC 1665, the Supreme Court indicated its willingness to consider whether an adjudicator's legal analysis and conclusion was so "legally unreasonable" as to amount to jurisdictional error.

Striking an oddly similar tone to non-jurisdictional error of law, a "legally unreasonable" jurisdictional error is one where an adjudicator makes a decision "which lacks an evident and intelligible justification." (Bouygues, quoting Minister for Immigration & Citizenship v Li (2013) 249 CLR 332 (Hayne, Kiefel and Bell JJ) 367 [76].) In Bouygues, the alleged error occurred when the adjudicator determined that the parties had agreed to forgo applying liquidated damages solely on the assertions of the claimant, without any supporting evidence or admission by the respondent that the agreement existed. (Bouygues, [15]–[19].) The applicant, Bouygues, asserted however, that this was a different type of error than that considered in Probuild. (Ibid [29].)

The situation remains fluid, however, as Bouygues was merely an interlocutory application seeking to stay the enforcement of the adjudication determination. The substantial issues are yet to be considered, particularly in light of the reasoning in Probuild. Nevertheless, Bouygues remains a case of interest.


Given the unique payment and adjudication structures inherent within the SOP Scheme, cases interpreting the scope of parties' rights must be followed carefully. Probuild and Maxcon are a useful reminder to the construction industry, at the very least in New South Wales and South Australia, of the risks inherent within adjudications under the SOP Scheme and the need to take care when drafting "pass through" provisions within subcontracts.

Greg Begaud Andrew Murray Tom Langsford
Construction and engineering
Colin Biggers & Paisley

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Norton Rose Fulbright Australia
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Norton Rose Fulbright Australia
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions