Australia: Does a deed of company arrangement (DOCA) extinguish claims by creditors for latent defects?

Last Updated: 30 March 2016
Article by Heather Collins

In brief - Building companies should consider a risk assessment of past projects

While an effectuated DOCA extinguishes all claims that existed at the time when a company was placed into administration, the law is not yet settled on whether this is also the case for latent defects claims which were not known at the time. To mitigate risk, building companies considering a DOCA should review all past projects.

DOCAs extinguish all known claims when company is placed into administration

In the building industry, it is common for defects to remain unknown for an extended period of time. During the intervening period the building company may have appointed an administrator, proceeded to a DOCA and effectuated the DOCA. One of the outcomes of an effectuated DOCA is that all claims that existed at the time when the company was placed into administration are extinguished. The question is whether a claim relating to a latent defect, which was not known to exist at the time that the company was placed into administration, is also extinguished by the operation of the DOCA.

Section 553(1) of the Corporations Act includes future and contingent claims, among others

Section 444D(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) provides:

A deed of company arrangement binds all creditors of the company, so far as concerns claims arising on or before the day specified in the deed under paragraph 444A(4)(i).

Under section 444A(4)(i), a DOCA must indicate what date on or before which claims must have arisen. Usually this date will be the date of appointment of the administrator. The courts have held that the use of the term "creditors" in Pt 5.3A is similar to its use in those parts of the Act that relate to winding up. (See Brash Holdings Ltd v Katile Pty Ltd [1996] 1 VR 24 at [34]) Therefore, the term "creditors" in section 444D(1) should be construed in accordance with section 553 of the Act.

Section 553(1) provides:

Subject to this Division and Division 8, in every winding up, all debts payable, by and all claims against, the company (present, future, certain or contingent, ascertained or sounding only in damages), being debts or claims the circumstances giving rise to which occurred before the relevant date, are admissible to proof against the company.

Therefore, it is clear that a DOCA will not only bind creditors with a debt that was due and payable at the time that the company was placed in administration, but also persons with a claim which is "future, certain or contingent, ascertained or sounding only in damages".

Defining whether a claim is contingent or prospective

It is then necessary to consider whether a latent defect claim falls within the definition of a contingent or prospective claim so as to be extinguished by the operation of the DOCA.

In Edwards & Ors v Attorney-General & Anor [2004] NSWCA 272 at [59] to [60] the NSW Court of Appeal considered the difference between actual and/or contingent claim and a "mere expectancy". According to the Court:

...A contingent creditor is a person to whom a corporation owes an existing obligation out of which a liability on its part to pay a sum of money will arise in a future event, whether that event be one which must happen or only an event which may happen...
.......a prospective creditor being one who is owed a sum of money not immediately payable but which will certainly become due in the future either on some date which has already been determined or on some date to be determinable by reference to future events...

However, the Full Federal Court in Lam Soon Australia Pty Ltd v Molit (No. 55) Pty Ltd [1996] 70 FCR 34 [at 43-44] noted, by way of obiter, that a right to sue for damages for a future breach of covenant is not a contingent claim until the breach occurs. Prior to the breach occurring, the Court considered any entitlement to be a mere expectancy which could not be classified as an admissible claim.

In Lam Soon, the right of the creditor was that of a landlord's claim for future rent.

Professor Donovan in Company Receivers & Administrators (Lawbook Co, Sydney, 2001) at [17.2810]) asserts that warranty holders should not be considered contingent creditors because a DOCA "is not intended to wipe the company's slate clean for all time and to deal with speculative claims. It is not intended to exorcise all the company's ghosts".

In Community Development Pty Ltd v Engwirda Construction Company [1969] HCA 47, the High Court considered whether a building company was a contingent creditor of a developer. The parties had entered into a contract for the construction of a block of home units. A dispute arose as to whether the building company had discharged its contractual obligations so as to become entitled to a final certificate. Under the contract, the building company had no moneys owing to it unless and until it could discharge those contractual obligations. The High Court held that the developer was: all material times, under a contractual obligation to pay to the respondent the amount, if any, which might be found by an arbitrator to be due to it under the building contract. Whether or not that obligation would ultimately result in a debt becoming payable by the appellant to the respondent was dependent on a contingency, namely the making of an award.... ((1969) 120 CLR 455 at 461-462)

Therefore, the High Court concluded that the building company was indeed a contingent creditor of the developer.

Latent defect claims are usually brought under statute, in contract or in tort

Most latent defect claims are brought:

  • under statute, for example the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) or other relevant state based legislation which implies warranties into relevant contracts
  • in contract (generally for breach of contractual warranties), or
  • in tort for breach of a relevant duty of care, generally to undertake the work in a proper and workmanlike manner or the like

In re Motor Group Australia Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 985, the Court considered whether a group of persons who purchased a new motor vehicle from the company and had a motor vehicle warranty but had not made a warranty claim were contingent or prospective creditors caught by the DOCA. Hely J regarded such persons as being contingent or prospective creditors as at the date of the voluntary administration because warranties had been issued prior to the company being placed in administration, notwithstanding that the liability on the warranty was dependent on the occurrence of later events.

In BE Australia WD Pty Ltd (subject to a deed of company arrangement) v Sutton [2011] NSWCA 414, the NSW Court of Appeal considered whether an undetermined court application constituted a "claim". The facts in that matter were that Ms Sutton had performed work as a consultant for BE Australia but had no direct contractual relationship with BE Australia. Her services were provided through labour hire companies. Prior to BE Australia being placed into administration, Ms Sutton's services were terminated without prior notice or payment in lieu of notice. Ms Sutton filed a claim with the Industrial Relations Commission alleging that the "arrangements" with BE Australia had been unfair and should be varied to provide that her services could not be terminated without reasonable notice. Shortly before the proceedings before the IRC were heard, BE Australia was placed into administration.

NSW Court of Appeal at odds with Full Federal Court over contingency claims

Campbell J of the NSW Court of Appeal analysed the differing views of the Full Federal Court in Lam Soon and the judgment of Hely J in Re Motor Group and said as follows:

In my view it follows inexorably from the remarks of Kitto J in Engwirda Constructions, treated as still relevant to section 553 by the majority in Sons of Gwalia, that the warranty creditors in Re Motor Group would be contingent creditors of the company. There might be big problems in valuing their claims: unless there was a sound statistical basis for estimating the probability that a particular car would turn out to have a defect within the warranty period, and a sound statistical basis for quantifying the likely cost of remedying a defect, the claims might need to be valued at zero or merely a nominal amount. But that does not deny that, as a matter of analysis, they are contingent creditors. The position of the warranty creditors in Re Motor Group is distinguishable from that of Ms Sutton, who at the start of the administration had no legal rights against the company at all.
The Full Federal Court in Lam Soon at 44 made the obiter remark that a right to sue for damages for a particular future breach of covenant to keep leased premises in repair was not even a contingent claim. To that extent, Lam Soon is, in my respectful opinion, contrary to the decisions in Engwirda and Sons of Gwalia that I am obliged to follow. There may be excellent reasons for concluding that the right to sue for damages for a particular future breach of a covenant to keep leased premises in repair could not be valued at anything other than zero or a nominal amount, but it still gives rise to a contingent claim. (At [200] to [201])

It is apparent from Campbell J's analysis that this area of law is not entirely settled and that the view of the NSW Court of Appeal is at odds with that of the Full Federal Court. Accordingly, for a building company considering a DOCA there is a risk that claims that are not yet manifest but which may arise in the future against them (such as latent building defects), may not be extinguished by the DOCA.

However, the NSW Supreme Court is bound to follow the decision in BE Australia, which is consistent with the High Court's approach in Engwirda Constructions and the general "basal fact" test which is often applied to determine whether a claim has arisen, e.g. Larkenden Pty Ltd v Lloyd Energy Systems Pty Ltd [2011] NSWSC 1567 at [57]. The High Court decision will also bind the courts of the other states and territories.

Likely that future latent defect claims bound by DOCA if building owner holds right pursuant to statutory or contractual warranty

Further, at a practical level, the differing approaches of the NSW Supreme Court and the Federal Court may not be relevant to the majority of latent defect claims. That is because most claims are brought on alternate bases (breach of contractual or statutory warranty and alternatively in tort for breach of a duty of care). In the case of a claim alleging a construction defect, the "breach" (of statutory or contractual warranty) which was considered relevant by the Federal Court, occurs at the time of construction.

Accordingly, in most instances the latent defect claim will have been elevated from a mere expectancy to a contingency prior to the administration commencing (providing the claim is based on a breach of warranty). That may not be the case in tort. Whilst the relevant breach has occurred, no cause of action (that is, legal entitlement) accrues until the damage becomes manifest which will potentially be after the administration commences. To that extent, claims in tort may suffer a similar fate to Ms Sutton.

Whilst not without some doubt, the most likely outcome, in either the Supreme Court of any state or the Federal Court, would be a finding that, because the building owner held the right pursuant to the statutory or contractual warranty at the time of appointment, then future claims in respect of latent defects are bound by the DOCA.

Review past projects to assess risk of latent defect claims

Given that the law is not settled in this area and it is not possible to be absolutely certain that a latent defect claim will be extinguished by an effectuated DOCA, it is recommended that any building company considering a DOCA should conduct an assessment of the risk associated with any claim against it for defective work by reviewing each project undertaken in the previous fifteen years and considering whether latent defect claims may still be available, pursuant to statutory or contractual warranties or in tort.

Heather Collins
Restructuring and insolvency
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.

Heather Collins
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”

Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). 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 & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd 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 or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.