Australia's court system is facing renewed scrutiny following revelations about the handling of confidential legal records, with opposition politicians and the Greens calling for an independent audit into multiple data breaches. The concerns centre on sensitive information connected to the Federal Court and the Federal Circuit and Family Court, including records that may contain deeply personal details about people's lives.

The latest developments concern allegations that court-related data was accessed in India on at least two occasions. One incident dates back to 2014, when a former senior employee of court transcription provider Auscript, Paul Cutbush, raised concerns about the overseas handling of sensitive material. He made public-interest disclosures to the courts and the Australian Federal Police.

Newly reported internal emails indicate that the Federal Court's chief executive, Sia Lagos, was notified in 2016 about the earlier matter. However, a spokesperson for the court said Lagos did not recall receiving a procedural notification about the historical incident. The court also rejected the suggestion that there had been a failure to act in relation to either the earlier incident or the more recent breach.

A second incident occurred in 2026 while VIQ Solutions was managing transcription services. The company subsequently shut down. The full extent of the information accessed during the incidents remains unclear, including how many files may have been involved.

Court transcripts can contain highly confidential information. Family law proceedings may involve domestic violence, child sexual abuse allegations, migration matters and property settlements. Other court records can relate to human rights cases, industrial relations disputes and major corporate litigation. The potential exposure of such material has raised concerns about privacy, national security and the protection of people involved in legal proceedings.

The Coalition and the Greens have called on Attorney-General Michelle Rowland to arrange a broader independent audit. Shadow Attorney-General Michaelia Cash has argued that the latest revelations strengthen the case for a coordinated investigation. Greens Leader David Shoebridge has also called for a public explanation of how earlier warnings were handled.

The Attorney-General's office has maintained that courts are responsible for their own operations and management. The dispute has therefore raised questions about the division of responsibility between individual courts and the federal government when sensitive information is handled by external service providers.

The Federal Court is reviewing a report prepared by cybersecurity firm Cyber CX into the latest breach. The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner has also received a privacy complaint and is examining the matter. The Federal Court and the family court have said they will provide information and cooperate with the relevant oversight processes.

The investigation will need to establish what information was accessed, whether any records were misused, how the incidents occurred and whether existing safeguards were adequate. Until those findings are available, the scale and consequences of the breaches remain uncertain.

The case has renewed attention on the risks involved when public institutions outsource services that require access to highly sensitive records. It has also intensified calls for clear accountability, stronger oversight and reliable safeguards for Australians who expect their legal information to remain confidential.