Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 14 OCTOBER 2023

Market Intelligence Thought Leadership Award Winner

Unlicensed contractors can claim under the Security of Payment Act

Highlights significant risk to consumers and developers by not knowing the requirements of the Security of Payment Act.

AustraliaReal Estate and Construction

The Supreme Court, in its recent judgment of Sunshine East Pty Ltd v CBEM Holdings Pty Ltd, reached the surprising and worrying conclusion that a builder who is not licensed and has failed to obtain mandatory insurance under the Home Building Act 1989 is still entitled to payment under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999.

Although the judgment is consistent with the objective of the Security of Payment Act as an interim payment scheme for the benefit of contractors, it is unlikely that those who drafted the Security of Payment Act intended that it could be used by a contractor operating in breach of the law to obtain payment, particularly in an unsophisticated consumer situation.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

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.

See more popular content from