Received a Payment Claim? Why Time Is Your Biggest Enemy

You’ve served your payment schedule disputing a construction payment claim. Now the claimant has applied for adjudication. What happens next? Many respondents enter the adjudication process unprepared, not realising how quickly decisions are made or how binding they are. Understanding the adjudication process under Queensland’s Building Industry Fairness (Security of Payment) Act 2017 and NSW’s Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 is critical to protecting your interests. What Is Adjudication? Adjudication is a fast-track dispute resolution process designed to provide interim cash flow relief while preserving parties’ rights to pursue final resolution through court or arbitration. An independent adjudicator reviews the payment claim, payment schedule, and supporting materials, then makes a binding determination on how much must be paid. The key word is interim. The adjudicator’s decision determines payment obligations temporarily, not permanently. However, most disputes end at adjudication – the cost and delay of further litigation means parties often accept the determination as final. The Timeline: Speed Is Everything Adjudication moves fast. Once an application is made: Queensland : You typically have 10 business days to file your adjudication response. The adjudicator then has 15 business days to make a determination (extendable to 20 days with consent). New South Wales: You have 5 business days to file your response (extendable to 10 days with claimant consent). The adjudicator has 10 business days to decide (extendable to 15 days). These timeframes are strictly enforced. Late submissions may be rejected entirely, leaving you unable to present your case. What goes into an Adjudication Response? Your adjudication response is your opportunity to defend your position. It must be comprehensive because you’re limited to the reasons you included in your payment schedule – no new arguments are permitted. A strong response typically includes: Detailed submissions: Explaining why the scheduled amount is correct, addressing each element of the claim Supporting evidence: Contracts, correspondence, site records, photographs, expert reports, invoices Legal analysis: Interpretation of contract terms, legislative requirements, and relevant case law Technical challenges: Jurisdictional objections, validity issues with the claim or adjudication application This is not a simple letter. Adjudication responses regularly run 30–50 pages with extensive annexures. The adjudicator will be reviewing both parties’ submissions simultaneously, so clarity and organisation matter. The Adjudicator’s Decision The adjudicator will issue a written determination setting out their decision and reasons. They can: Uphold the claimed amount in full Accept your scheduled amount Determine a different amount between the two In both Queensland and NSW, you must pay the adjudicated amount within 5 business days (or as specified in the determination). Failure to pay can result in the claimant suspending work or, more seriously, obtaining a judgment for the debt and pursuing enforcement action against your company. Can You Challenge the Decision? Yes, but the grounds are narrow. You can apply to court to set aside an adjudication determination for: Jurisdictional error: The adjudicator made a decision they had no power to make Denial of natural justice: You weren’t given a fair opportunity to present your case Generally, you cannot challenge the adjudicator’s decision simply because you disagree with their assessment of the facts or law. The threshold for setting aside a determination is high. Importantly, you must still pay the adjudicated amount even while challenging the determination. The principle is “pay now, argue later.” The Importance of Early Preparation The adjudication timeframes are tight. Once you serve a payment schedule disputing a claim, you should assume adjudication is coming and start preparing immediately: Waiting until the adjudication application arrives leaves you scrambling. In NSW, with only 5 business days to respond, delay can be fatal to your case. Get Legal Guidance Adjudication is a high-pressure, time-critical process that requires immediate action and strategic thinking. Whether you’re facing an adjudication application or considering applying for one yourself, experienced legal advice makes the difference between success and failure. CJM Lawyers’ litigation and dispute resolution team regularly represents clients in security of payment adjudications across Queensland and NSW. We understand what adjudicators look for, how to present your case effectively, and how to protect your interests under tight deadlines. Don’t navigate adjudication alone – contact CJM Lawyers today. Disclaimer: This article provides general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Every adjudication is unique and requires specific legal advice tailored to your circumstances. Contact CJM Lawyers promptly if you are involved in a security of payment dispute.

A Practical Perspective for NSW and Queensland Matters In New South Wales and Queensland, the legal profession is fused. Both solicitors and barristers are qualified legal practitioners, and there is no procedural requirement to brief counsel at any particular stage of a matter. That often leads clients to delay the decision. In practice, the question is not whether a barrister is required, but whether the matter has reached a point where the risks involved justify specialist advocacy and advice. Engaging a barrister is not a sign that a dispute has escalated beyond control. It is a strategic decision about how that dispute should be managed. What a Barrister Actually Brings to a Matter Barristers are commonly associated with court appearances and trials. In reality, much of their value lies well before a matter reaches a hearing. They are trained to analyse risk, test legal arguments, and anticipate how a court is likely to respond to a case as it develops. Early involvement often focuses on advising on prospects, settling pleadings, shaping evidence, and identifying which issues genuinely matter. In many cases, this prevents problems that become expensive or impossible to correct later. The Importance of Timing One of the most common points at which counsel should be considered is before pleadings are finalised. Once pleadings are filed, positions harden. Admissions may be made inadvertently, causes of action may be poorly framed, and procedural vulnerabilities may be exposed. Fixing these issues later usually involves contested applications and additional cost. Similarly, when interlocutory applications are threatened or underway, the stakes increase quickly. Applications such as strike-outs, summary judgment, or injunctions can determine the direction of a matter long before trial. These are moments where technical precision and courtroom experience matter. Another common trigger is when a dispute turns on a narrow or unsettled point of law. Some cases are fact driven. Others are decided almost entirely on statutory interpretation or competing authorities. Where that is the case, specialist advice is not a luxury – it is essential. Costs Risk and Commercial Reality Litigation is not just about the merits of a claim. It is also about costs exposure. As matters progress, the financial consequences of getting strategy wrong increase. A barrister can provide clear advice on when to push forward, when to reassess, and when settlement should be actively pursued. There is a persistent misconception that briefing counsel necessarily increases costs. In practice, targeted advice at the right time often reduces overall expenditure by narrowing issues, avoiding unnecessary applications, and strengthening settlement positions. NSW and Queensland Considerations While the core principles are consistent across jurisdictions, procedural culture differs slightly. In New South Wales, courts tend to scrutinise pleadings closely and are more receptive to early dispositive applications. This often makes early engagement of counsel particularly valuable. Queensland courts are generally more pragmatic in their approach to case management, but the risk profile still shifts sharply once a matter moves beyond informal negotiation or becomes procedurally complex. In both jurisdictions, the underlying question remains the same: what is the consequence if the current approach is wrong? A Collaborative Model Engaging a barrister does not mean the solicitor steps aside. The solicitor remains responsible for carriage of the matter, evidence gathering, and client communication. Counsel provides a complementary skill set: strategic distance, advocacy experience, and deep familiarity with how courts approach particular issues. The most effective outcomes are usually achieved where solicitors and barristers work together early, rather than when counsel is briefed reactively on the eve of a hearing. Conclusion There is no fixed rule as to when a barrister should be engaged. However, most disputes reach a point where the risks – legal, procedural, or financial, change materially. At that point, the real question is not whether engaging a barrister is necessary, but whether proceeding without one is a risk worth taking. Disputes can arise in everyday life – with neighbours, family members, business partners, landlords, builders, or customers. Often, they start small and quickly become stressful, emotional, and hard to manage. Our litigation team helps you understand your options early, cut through the noise, and work towards the best possible outcome by providing the necessary advice and action. Don’t face the situation alone, talk to CJM Lawyers today!