Contractor’s Dilemma: Recovering debts from a Principal in liquidation

A party must meet a high bar before the High Court will modify or reverse a liquidator’s decision, or consent to a party commencing adjudication (or other legal proceedings) against a company in liquidation (ss 284(1)(b) and 248(1)(c) of the Companies Act 1993, respectively).

Both issues have been examined by the Court of Appeal in United Civil Construction Ltd v Hayfield SHA Ltd (In Liq) [2023] NZCA 377.  This case illustrates the limited avenues available for a contractor to resolve payment of outstanding debts after a principal goes into liquidation. 


The Principal (Hayfield), a special development company formed by a group of landowners, entered into a contract with United Civil Construction Ltd (United Civil) to construct civil infrastructure.  Difficulties arose, which resulted in United Civil suspending work and then terminating the contract. Hayfield was then placed in liquidation.

Nearly $3m was owed to United Civil.  The liquidators endeavoured to negotiate with the landowners to recover amounts owing under the funding agreements to pay United Civil.  United Civil then made further creditor claims in the liquidation for interest and costs arising from termination (the Termination Claims).  United Civil’s combined claims accounted for 80% of the debt owed by the Principal (i.e. it was by far the largest creditor).

After three years of non-payment, and no admission of its Termination Claims, United Civil applied to the Hight Court seeking recourse.  When the application was unsuccessful, United Civil appealed. 

Recovery Issues

Enforcement against debtors

The first issue was whether the liquidators’ decision to negotiate (rather than sue the landowners) for the recovery of funds met the threshold of being ‘wrong or unreasonable’ to justify the Court intervening.  The likely benefits and disadvantages of litigation compared to negotiation needed to be weighed up.  Although litigation may place pressure to pay, in the circumstances this did not outweigh the negative aspects that would arise from litigation (including delay, expense, and uncertainty).  The Court of Appeal therefore upheld the High Court’s decision not to interfere in the liquidator’s approach to negotiate and not sue.

Adjudication during liquidation

The second issue was whether the Court should permit United Civil to commence adjudication against Hayfield while it was in liquidation to resolve (or confirm) the Termination Claims. The Court of Appeal declined to grant permission.  All but one issue could be determined by agreed processes (expert opinion and negotiation) between the parties outside of litigation which had been used successfully to date.  The remaining issue (lost profits and irrecoverable expenditure) may have been more suited to adjudication, however, the basis of this claim had not been put to the liquidators and so leave to adjudicate could not be justified.   

Our comment 

The Court of Appeal’s judgment means contractors can be left in a difficult position trying to recover payment from principals in liquidations, even when the liquidator ought to come into funds. Despite three years of negotiation, United Civil could not compel the liquidator to enforce recovery from the landowners through the courts. At a practical level, at least, this is surprising. Further, it seems surprising that the Court did not impose a timeframe on the liquidator, thereby leaving United Civil in the unenviable position of having to simply wait for the negotiations to take their course.  

It appears United Civil have not yet sought leave to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court, and the period for doing so has now expired.

If you have any questions about recovery from an insolvent party, please get in touch with our Construction Team or your usual contact at Hesketh Henry.


Disclaimer:  The information contained in this article is current at the date of publishing and is of a general nature.  It should be used as a guide only and not as a substitute for obtaining legal advice.  Specific legal advice should be sought where required.


Do you need expert legal advice?
Contact the expert team at Hesketh Henry.
Media contact - Kerry Browne
Please contact Kerry with any media enquiries and with any questions related to marketing or sponsorships on +64 9 375 8747 or via email.

Related Articles / Insights & Opinion

iStock  Construction dpi
Call me? Care is required when calling on a bond
In the recent High Court decision Hawkins Ltd v Elizabeth Properties Ltd, Hawkins was successful in preventing EPL from calling on a $3m bond pending determination of a dispute principally over the ap...
HH News NZS  Release
What You Need to Know About the New NZS3910:2023
The new NZS3910:2023 (conditions of contract for building and civil engineering construction) was released by Standards New Zealand in December 2024 (see our article here).  It is now gaining relevan...
10.04.2024 Posted in Construction
Money stack black and white
Income is classified as relationship property – surprised?
For all couples, embarking on the journey of building a life together involves not only love and commitment but also financial considerations.  As you navigate through shared finances, it’s imp...
26.03.2024 Posted in Private Wealth
Forestry Unsplash ruben hanssen wl ylTCM
Forestry: Regulatory Roundup March 2024
The challenging economic environment for New Zealand’s forestry industry continues, with China’s demand for our logs remaining subdued. Moreover, in addition to the change in Government, t...
25.03.2024 Posted in Forestry & Property
OIO Spotlight: Solar projects, exempted interests and farmland considerations
As New Zealand renewable energy developments continue to attract interest from global investors, we take a look at some recent approaches of the Overseas Investment Office in assessing consent require...
BCC Trade Credit v Thera Agri Capital: Policyholder Successful Against Credit Insurer in Australian Court of Appeal Decision
When applying for trade credit insurance, a prospective insured will typically provide information on the financing arrangements that will form the basis of cover. Where there is deviation from these ...
05.03.2024 Posted in Insurance & Trade and Transport
Parker v Magnum Hire: A new era of personal grievance remedies awarded in the Employment Relations Authority?
If you heard a sudden loud noise last week – no it wasn’t a jet plane flying overhead, it was the gasp of employment lawyers across New Zealand when the Employment Relations Authority published it...
26.02.2024 Posted in Employment
Send us an enquiry

For expert legal advice, please complete the form below or call us on (09) 375 8700.