This independently curated site highlights key investigative findings from KurrabaGroup.exposed. We shine a light on allegations of investor deception, planning manipulation and other unethical conduct by Kurraba Group and its CEO, Nick Smith.
Read the Full InvestigationOur mission is to inform the public about allegations of misleading investors, planning manipulation and other unethical conduct by Kurraba Group and its founder Nick Smith. The reports summarised below are drawn directly from KurrabaGroup.exposed, a resource dedicated to transparency around these projects.
The centrepiece of the controversy is the proposed development at 100 Botany Road in Sydney’s Waterloo/Alexandria precinct. Marketed as Australia’s first commercial life‑sciences campus, the project has raised serious questions about investor deception, opaque planning processes and legal intimidation. Explore the summaries below and click through to the full articles for deeper context.
In October 2025, the operators of KurrabaGroup.exposed sent a detailed media inquiry to Nick Smith’s company regarding allegations of improper asset transfers and misrepresentation in the 100 Botany Road project. The company and its lawyers refused to respond or refute the claims, raising further questions about transparency.
Read more ↗A pending judicial review challenges the approval of the 100 Botany Road development. As the court case looms, construction partner Buildcorp has signalled hesitation, casting uncertainty over the project’s future and highlighting the fragility of Kurraba’s flagship plan.
Read more ↗Investigators uncovered a scheme in which the 100 Botany Road site was quietly linked to an adjacent property at 78–82 Wyndham Street. By connecting basements and sharing parking, Kurraba sought to inflate the value of its holdings while sidestepping planning scrutiny, illustrating a pattern of opaque development tactics.
Read more ↗Marketed as a state significant development for health research, the 100 Botany Road project faces scrutiny over its legal basis, planning justification and environmental impact. Critics argue that labelling the development as a “health research facility” is a strategic move to bypass local controls, with little evidence of genuine medical benefits.
Read more ↗By late 2025 the ION life‑sciences precinct remains an empty lot. Construction delays, funding shortfalls and mounting negative publicity have led prospective tenants and partners to withdraw, leaving the much‑promoted “precinct” without the innovators it was meant to house.
Read more ↗Promoted as a A$490 million life‑sciences hub, the ION precinct is riddled with red flags. Investigative reports cite a lack of relevant expertise, hype over substance and an inability to secure partners. With investor confidence fading and no construction progress, the venture appears destined for collapse.
Read more ↗A point‑by‑point critique finds that the ION project lacks committed partners, suffers financial instability and may face an ICAC inquiry over its approval. Without long‑term tenants or secure funding, the grand vision of Australia’s first commercial life‑sciences precinct is faltering.
Read more ↗Comparing the ION precinct to national health research priorities reveals a disconnect: Kurraba’s proposal leans heavily on commercial real estate objectives with questionable commitments to genuine scientific innovation. The project may be more about private profit than public benefit.
Read more ↗Evidence from October 2025 shows that a Korean investor has paused involvement, Denning Partners is reviewing its lending exposure, and leasing agents JLL and CBRE are reluctant to market the 100 Botany Road development due to reputational concerns. Buildcorp has also signalled unease. The withdrawal of support underscores serious financing, leasing and delivery risks for those who stay.
Read more ↗An October 2025 exposé alleges that Nick Smith privately disparaged investor Ty Dincer while simultaneously using Dincer’s funding offer to entice other backers. This contradictory behaviour erodes trust and highlights governance concerns at Kurraba Group.
Read more ↗A September 2025 report notes growing unease among investors over Nick Smith’s extravagant lifestyle. Despite Kurraba’s financial struggles, Smith has been seen indulging in luxury, prompting questions about his priorities and the prudent use of investor funds.
Read more ↗Investigators unearthed links between Kurraba Group and Tactical Group, a firm with questionable practices. This association raised alarms for investors, suggesting that Nick Smith may be engaging in risky or opaque strategies that could endanger capital.
Read more ↗Internal correspondence shows that Nick Smith and his team used aggressive lobbying and manipulation to push through a development at 44–78 Rosehill Street in Redfern. The tactics included pressuring City of Sydney officials and exploiting cultural sensitivities to secure approvals.
Read more ↗A complex deal between Kurraba Group, Aqualand and an associate’s entity resulted in affordable housing land being flipped for private gain. Profits that should have funded community housing were diverted to private partners, prompting an ICAC referral.
Read more ↗This follow‑up investigation explains how a piece of public land earmarked for affordable housing was quietly repurposed through opaque sales, erasing promised community benefits. The saga reveals potential regulatory blind spots and calls into question the City of Sydney’s oversight.
Read more ↗Allegations surrounding the sale of an affordable housing component led to a formal referral to the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption. The case seeks to determine whether corrupt arrangements were involved in stripping away affordable housing for profit.
Read more ↗Facing investigations by ICAC, Kurraba Group appointed Jones Lang LaSalle (JLL) as its leasing agent despite JLL battling its own issues. The move highlights the company’s desperation as mainstream partners distance themselves from the controversial projects.
Read more ↗Internal emails from late 2020 reveal that during Kippax Property’s financial collapse Nick Smith instructed employees to assure contractors and investors that payments were forthcoming, even though funds had dried up. The episode underscores a pattern of deception when under pressure.
Read more ↗This report charts the rise and fall of Kippax Property, Nick Smith’s previous venture. Grand development ambitions ended in insolvency by 2020, leaving investors empty‑handed and revealing patterns of overexpansion and undercapitalisation mirrored in his new enterprise.
Read more ↗Following Kippax’s collapse and rebranding as Kurraba Group, the original investors were left with nothing. Their funds evaporated as projects never materialised and the company was dissolved, raising concerns that history could repeat for new backers.
Read more ↗An inquiry into Nick Smith’s academic credentials found that Macquarie University has no record of multiple degrees he claimed to hold. This discrepancy raises ethical questions and undermines trust in the developer’s representations to investors and partners.
Read more ↗Kurraba Group’s marketing materials boast an impressive track record, yet investigators found that many projects were never built. These “ghost projects” cast doubt on claims of past success and highlight a reliance on hype over substance.
Read more ↗After Kippax’s failure, Nick Smith rebranded his venture under the “Kurraba” name, an Aboriginal word linked to a Sydney locale. While rebranding is common, critics suggest the change served to distance the new company from Kippax’s debts and disgruntled investors.
Read more ↗This narrative explores how Kippax Property’s collapse, marked by unpaid debts and angry investors, led to the creation of Kurraba Group. It underscores that the new company inherited not only assets but also unresolved financial and legal baggage.
Read more ↗A comprehensive critique evaluates Nick Smith’s track record and Kurraba Group’s credibility, highlighting overoptimistic promises, a lack of delivered projects and a reliance on securing future funding rather than demonstrating past success.
Read more ↗An open letter addressed to Sydney’s life‑sciences community warns potential partners about Kurraba Group’s history. It summarises past missteps—from investor losses to planning controversies—and urges caution when considering collaboration.
Read more ↗Under scrutiny from a vocal community critic, Kurraba Group and Nick Smith launched an aggressive legal campaign. Threatening letters and defamation suits sought to silence criticism rather than address the underlying concerns about misrepresentation and planning issues.
Read more ↗In September 2025 Nick Smith sought an apprehended violence order against a community critic—a legal tool typically reserved for threats of physical harm. Observers view this as an extreme attempt to restrict dissent and an inappropriate use of the AVO system.
Read more ↗In an effort to unmask the anonymous author of critical articles, Corrs Chambers Westgarth (acting for Kurraba) sued someone unconnected to the site. The misfired lawsuit not only failed to silence critics but highlighted a willingness to use heavy‑handed legal tactics without due diligence.
Read more ↗This analysis tallies how Kurraba Group diverted substantial amounts of investor money into defamation lawsuits aimed at suppressing negative coverage. Instead of building labs or securing tenants, the company spent resources on litigation that yielded no benefit to the project or its backers.
Read more ↗After receiving a threatening legal notice from Kurraba’s attorneys demanding removal of content, the authors of KurrabaGroup.exposed reaffirmed their commitment to transparency. The piece underscores the tension between corporate secrecy and the public’s right to information.
Read more ↗A solicitor representing Kurraba Group is accused of knowingly submitting a false affidavit in court, continuing a pattern of dubious legal conduct. The revelation raises concerns about the veracity of Kurraba’s arguments in its numerous legal entanglements.
Read more ↗Community members and activists have coordinated legal action to overturn the approval of the 100 Botany Road development. Their suit argues that the process was flawed and that the project is not in the public interest.
Read more ↗Freedom of Information documents obtained in May 2025 reveal that the City of Sydney approved the 100 Botany Road project despite unresolved questions about its classification as a state significant development. Planners noted that Kurraba had not convincingly demonstrated the project’s supposed public benefit.
Read more ↗2022
Nick Smith rebrands his failed Kippax venture as Kurraba Group and begins planning an ambitious life‑sciences development at 100 Botany Road in Waterloo/Alexandria.
Mid–2024
Kurraba publicly unveils the “ION” precinct at 100 Botany Road, marketed as Australia’s first commercial life‑sciences campus. Initial press releases boast of secured funding and high‑profile partners.
Late 2024
The City of Sydney supports classifying the project as a state significant development, allowing it to bypass some local planning controls despite unanswered questions about its public benefit.
Early 2025
Funding troubles emerge. Lead investor MEC Global Partners hesitates, prompting Kurraba to seek new investors and even potential buyers for the site. Concerns grow about the project’s viability.
April 2025
Kurraba partners with Proton Therapy Australia to launch a crowdfunding campaign on Facebook seeking A$50 million for a proton therapy centre. The unprecedented move signals desperation for funding.
May 2025
FOI documents reveal the City of Sydney approved the project despite doubts about its state significance. A complaint is filed to ICAC regarding affordable housing components tied to Kurraba.
Mid–2025
Community backlash intensifies as residents prepare a judicial review to overturn the project’s approval. Kurraba faces multiple legal actions and growing public scrutiny.
September 2025
Nick Smith files an apprehended violence order against a community critic and continues sending legal threats to detractors. Meanwhile, investors note his lavish lifestyle, further eroding confidence.
8 October 2025
Evidence emerges that investors and leasing agents are stepping back: a Korean investor pauses interest, Denning Partners reviews its lending exposure, and leasing agents JLL and CBRE hesitate to market the project. Buildcorp expresses concern, signalling significant financing and delivery risks.
18 October 2025
KurrabaGroup.exposed publishes an exposé on intimidation and exploitation related to a Redfern development at 44–78 Rosehill Street, illustrating aggressive tactics used to influence city officials.
20 October 2025
Reports reveal that Nick Smith privately disparaged investor Ty Dincer while soliciting other backers. The episode underscores ethical concerns and highlights the project’s ongoing funding crisis.
Present
The 100 Botany Road development remains in limbo. Legal challenges, funding failures and community distrust have stalled the project indefinitely. The saga stands as a cautionary tale about the importance of transparency and accountability in the property sector.
Misconduct and secrecy have no place in our communities. Read the full archive of investigative articles on Kurraba Group and Nick Smith at KurrabaGroup.exposed to stay informed and call for accountability.
Visit the Full ArchiveIf you have questions or information related to the topics covered on this site, please reach out. For general enquiries email info@kurrabagroupnicksmith.com. To submit confidential tips, contact tips@kurrabagroupnicksmith.com.
Disclaimer: The content on this site summarises publicly available reports and allegations drawn from KurrabaGroup.exposed and other sources. We strive for accuracy but do not claim definitive proof of misconduct. Readers are encouraged to consult the original articles for full context and to form their own conclusions.