SINGAPORE, Oct. 12, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- The Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) has approved a scheme of arrangement for Jetstar Asia Airways Pte Ltd, enabling nearly 194,000 consumer creditors to recover claims arising from unused tickets, bookings, and vouchers. The grounds of decision, delivered by SICC International Judge Christopher Scott Sontchi on 24 September 2026, provided significant guidance on the use of administrative convenience classes under section 210 of the Singapore Companies Act.

The scheme follows the decision to permanently cease the Jetstar Asia business and wind up the company on a solvent basis. With financial backing from its parent company Qantas Group, Jetstar Asia had already launched a comprehensive refund programme to repay all eligible retail customer claims in full and settle its remaining liabilities. However, even after approximately six months, uptake of the programme remained low, prompting the development of a formal scheme of arrangement.

With this scheme, full recovery of all approved claims by both consumer and non-consumer creditors is provided for. Its central feature was the creation of an administrative convenience class comprising all 194,200 consumer creditors, who would not be required to vote on the scheme but would be deemed to have unanimously approved its terms. In return, they would be repaid in full. This approach avoided the need to pause the existing refund programme to conduct a vote among nearly 194,000 creditors — a process that would have taken a considerable amount of time and resources disproportionate to the average size of individual consumer claims.

The scheme received unanimous support from all nine non-consumer creditors present at the scheme meeting. Pacific Airlines, which had initially filed a notice of disagreement after its proof of debt was rejected and it was excluded from the scheme, withdrew its objection one day before the sanction hearing following a settlement with the applicant.

On the legal framework, the SICC held that sections 210(3AB) and 210(1) of the Companies Act together give the court considerable latitude in determining how voting requirements may be satisfied, and that this latitude provides the statutory basis for creating an administrative convenience class. The court also set out the conditions under which such a class may be used without causing undue prejudice. The applicant must justify the gains in efficacy or administrative convenience; the court must assess prejudice to both members of the class and those outside it; the mechanism must not be used to gerrymander or abuse the cram-down process; and the interests of the non-voting class must not be adversely affected by the scheme.

The SICC found no undue prejudice on the facts, noting that all scheme creditors were entitled to full repayment, and that there was clear administrative benefit in avoiding a large-scale voting exercise.

For the full judgment, visit [2026] SGHC(I) 22.