hello. we’re glad you’re
getting in touch.
Fill in form below, or simply call us on 1800 888 966
one eagle
level 30, 1 eagle street
brisbane qld 4000
+61 7 3235 0400
grosvenor place
level 11, 225 george st,
sydney nsw 2000
+61 2 8298 9533
naylor house
3/191 pulteney st,
adelaide sa 5000
+61 8 8451 6900
Nathanael Kitingan is the Managing Principal of Macpherson Kelley’s Melbourne office.
Nathanael gained a strong grounding in civil procedure early in his career through regular appearances and advocacy work in courts and mediations. This experience shaped his strategic approach to litigation and dispute resolution. With extensive expertise in commercial litigation and corporate and personal insolvency, he regularly advises insolvency practitioners, directors, creditors and companies on disputes, restructures, security enforcement and Corporations Act issues.
Whether it’s employing the shortest, most effective route to achieve a quick result, salvaging a distressed asset or securing the best possible commercial outcome for a client, Nathanael is always considering all angles.
Nathanael understands the balance required to be an effective litigator and insolvency lawyer. He combines strong technical expertise with sharp negotiation and relationship-building skills to help clients navigate complex matters with confidence. His experience includes shareholder disputes, debt recovery, leasing and property disputes, contractual issues, construction disputes and litigious insolvency proceedings.
Nathanael’s overseas adventures helped him develop compassion for all people he comes across in his dealings as a litigation and insolvency lawyer. This compassion means he connects better with clients and stakeholders, putting him in a much better position to resolve a dispute.
“Nathanael and his team at Macpherson Kelley are proactive, hardworking lawyers. Nathanael’s straight talking, commercial approach to achieving outcomes has produced excellent results for me and I would highly recommend his services.”
Shane Cremin, Director, Rogers Reidy
![]() |
Accredited Specialist, Commercial Litigation, Law Institute of Victoria |
| Advanced certificate, Insolvency, ARITA
Master of Law, Commercial Litigation Bachelor of Science, Genetics |
Professional member, ARITA
President, Australia Malaysia Business Council
Litigation executive committee member, Law institute Victoria
Magistrates’ Court of Victoria Civil Practice Committee
Nathanael acted for the owner of a CBD building facing a multi-million dollar claim in VCAT by a tenant for loss and damages, under a breach of its lease. Negotiation attempts over the course of a 3-year litigation failed and the parties headed into a long trial. With some sharp attention to detail and preparation, Nathanael and his team managed to knock out the tenant’s case on the first day of trial, showing the company suffering the alleged loss and damages was not the tenant and had no legal link to the lease to allow it claim anything. Nathanael’s client won the case and was awarded indemnity costs on the basis that the tenant had brought a vexatious and hopeless proceeding. This is very rare under the Retail Leases Act. Unsatisfied, the tenant appealed the decision to the Court of Appeal which again found in favour of Nathanael’s client.
Nathanael and his team acted for a company director, facing claims of insolvent trading, unreasonable director related actions and breaches of duties. The director’s husband had gone bankrupt and she was involved because the couple had mingled their personal and company finances. The client feared losing her house – her last remaining asset. The case was complicated, as a lack of record keeping was a the initial cause of the problem, making a defence even more difficult. Nathanael and his team were able to negotiate a settlement that avoided bankruptcy for the director and allowed her to keep her house.
Nathanael and team had to act quickly when a liquidator needed to freeze the assets of a company director and his wife. Documents had been forged by the company director, redirecting money paid by creditors into his and his wife’s personal accountants. Freezing orders were obtained before the company director was able to further dispense the assets, allowing for proceedings to be issued and a settlement to be negotiated, facilitating a dividend to the creditors.