No OAIC probe of collapsed VIQ over court transcription work in India

The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) will not investigate collapsed court transcription provider VIQ Solutions, despite seeing "a reasonable basis for concern" that it breached privacy law.

The decision closes preliminary inquiries that began in May, after the ABC revealed in February that Australian court transcription work contracted to VIQ had been handled by e24 Technologies in Chennai.

In an assessment, the regulator said VIQ may have breached Australian Privacy Principle (APP) 11, which requires reasonable steps to protect personal information from unauthorised access.

However, OAIC said the incident was "materially smaller than media reporting suggested", and pointed to the courts' response and VIQ's liquidation.

"These inquiries have informed my view that further investigation is not warranted and a further application of resources cannot be justified noting that VIQ is now in liquidation and has ceased its Australian operations," Elizabeth Tydd, Australian information commissioner, said.

The report found five e24 employees in India were given access to VIQ's Australian transcription platform between September 2025 and February 2026.

Three accessed audio snippets from 93 matters across the Federal Court and the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The OAIC said VIQ's Canadian parent "inadvertently" added the e24 staff, who worked under the parent's global transcription contract.

ABC reported earlier a VIQ management memo assured staff the e24 resources were in Sydney, not India.

The regulator judged an APP 8 breach was unlikely, reasoning that the audio stayed on VIQ's Australian servers and could not be downloaded, so it was never disclosed overseas.

Those controls were described by VIQ and its parent, and the OAIC said it "did not verify the extent to which these policies and procedures were implemented and followed in practice".

The day before the publication of the OAIC report, an independent review commissioned by the FCFCoA found the audio snippets ran for five minutes, and not the 15 minutes VIQ had stated.

The OAIC said this had "no material impact" on its conclusions.

Neither court had to inform affected litigants.

The courts also assessed the risk of harm as low.

That is despite Australian family law proceedings carrying criminal penalties for publishing identifying details.

VIQ ceased its Australian operations in July and resolved to wind them up on August 5.