Mark Jervis v The Information Commissioner
[2023] UKFTT 208 (GRC)
Adam Abuwarda v The Information Commissioner
31 August 2023
[2023] UKFTT 691 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone appealed because they thought the government agency investigating their request wasn't thorough enough. The court said it could only check if the final decision was correct, not how the investigation was done, so it dismissed the appeal.
Key Facts
- •Adam Abuwarda appealed an Information Commissioner's Decision Notice that the Environment Agency (EA) did not hold information requested about a tree removal risk assessment.
- •The appeal challenged the adequacy of the Information Commissioner's investigation into the EA's response and questioned the EA's risk assessment procedures.
- •The Information Commissioner applied to strike out the appeal, arguing it was outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction.
- •The EA explained their two-stage risk assessment process (pre-work and dynamic) and the reasons for the unavailability of documentation.
Legal Principles
The Tribunal's jurisdiction is limited to reviewing the Information Commissioner's Decision Notice, not the conduct of the investigation or the underlying actions of the EA.
Section 58(1) FOIA
The Information Commissioner is entitled to accept the EA's responses unless there's evidence of misleading information or an error in applying the law.
Tribunal's Ruling
The Tribunal will strike out an appeal if the outcome sought is outside its jurisdiction.
Tribunal Rule 8(2)(a)
The Information Commissioner's Decision Notice must be in accordance with the law.
Tribunal's Ruling
Outcomes
The Tribunal granted the application to strike out the appeal.
The appeal's primary focus was on the EA's conduct and investigative process, which falls outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction under section 58(1) FOIA. The appellant failed to show the Decision Notice was unlawful.