James and Inspector-General in Bankruptcy

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr James against a decision of the Inspector-General in Bankruptcy regarding the amendment of information recorded on the National Personal Insolvency Index (NPII). Mr James sought to have the NPII amended to reflect that he was no longer an undischarged bankrupt and that he had filed his Statement of Affairs (SOA) by 30 June 2008, rather than the recorded date of 24 October 2018. The Inspector-General contended that the NPII accurately reflected the lodgement of the SOA and that Mr James had not been discharged from bankruptcy.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether the information recorded on the NPII concerning Mr James' bankruptcy was inaccurate or misleading, and if so, whether there was a basis for its amendment. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider the Inspector-General's arguments that Mr James had failed to file his SOA with the Official Receiver as required by section 54 of the relevant Act, that posting the SOA to a trustee did not constitute filing with the Official Receiver, and that the NPII correctly recorded the filing date and Mr James' undischarged bankrupt status.

The Tribunal affirmed the Inspector-General's decision, reasoning that the power to amend the NPII is derived from regulation 13.04 of the Bankruptcy Regulations, which permits correction only if the information is inaccurate or misleading. Applying the principle that the AAT stands in the shoes of the original decision-maker and hears matters de novo, the Tribunal found that the NPII accurately recorded the date Mr James filed his SOA and that he remained an undischarged bankrupt. The Tribunal concluded that the information on the NPII was neither inaccurate nor misleading, and therefore, there was no basis for amendment under regulation 13.04.