Gow and Registrar of Personal Property Securities

The applicant, Ms. Gow, sought review of a decision by a delegate of the Registrar of Personal Property Securities (the Registrar) to remove a registration from the Personal Property Securities Register (PPS Register) and make it unavailable for search. The registration in question, number 201804100003322, was made by Ms. Gow over a motor vehicle. Volkswagen Financial Services Australia Pty Ltd (Volkswagen), the original secured party, had demanded the removal of Ms. Gow's registration on the basis that no collateral described in the registration secured any obligation owed by a debtor to Ms. Gow, as authorised by Item 1 in section 178(1) of the *Personal Property Securities Act 2009* (Cth) (the PPS Act).

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Ms. Gow possessed a valid security interest in the motor vehicle that entitled her to maintain the registration on the PPS Register, and if so, whether the secured obligation remained outstanding. This required the Tribunal to consider the provisions of section 181 and the table in section 178(1) of the PPS Act, which govern the amendment and removal of registrations. The Tribunal also had to determine if there were reasonable grounds to suspect that the amendment demand was not authorised.

The Tribunal reasoned that for a security interest to be registrable, there must be a consensual transaction that gives rise to the security interest, meaning a security agreement must exist. Ms. Gow's allegations concerning breaches of contract, errors in loan amounts, and misleading conduct by Volkswagen did not establish that Volkswagen had granted her a security interest in the collateral. The Tribunal noted that its role was not to resolve the broader commercial dispute between the parties but to focus on the apparent presence or absence of a security interest on the register. Applying the principles from *Denbride Pty Ltd and Registrar of Personal Property Securities*, the Tribunal found that Ms. Gow's claims, even if accepted, did not demonstrate that she held an unsecured debt owed by Volkswagen, nor did they establish a security agreement where Volkswagen granted her an interest in the collateral.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that there were no reasonable grounds to suspect that the amendment to the PPS Register sought by Volkswagen was not authorised under section 178 of the PPS Act. The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that the amendment of the registration in accordance with the amendment demand was appropriate.