Jefferson Moutinho Arnauth v The Information Commissioner
[2023] UKFTT 217 (GRC)
Colin Orford v The Information Commissioner
11 December 2023
[2023] UKFTT 1024 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Colin complained to the Information Commissioner about a data issue. The Commissioner responded. Colin then tried to appeal to a Tribunal. The Tribunal said it couldn't help because the Commissioner had already made a decision. The appeal was thrown out.
Key Facts
- •Colin Orford appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) under s. 166 of the Data Protection Act 2018.
- •The Information Commissioner (ICO) issued an outcome letter to Orford on 26 June 2023.
- •The ICO applied to strike out Orford's appeal.
- •The Tribunal considered the application to strike out the appeal.
Legal Principles
The Tribunal's powers under s. 166 DPA 2018 are limited to ordering the ICO to take specified steps to respond to a complaint; it cannot review the ICO's merits-based decision or direct a specific outcome.
s. 166(2) DPA 2018; R (Delo) v ICO [2022] EWHC 3046 (Admin)
Section 166 DPA 2018 applies only where a complaint is pending and has not reached the outcome stage; it does not apply to merits-based outcome decisions.
R (Delo) v ICO [2022] EWHC 3046 (Admin) at [128]
A Tribunal lacks jurisdiction under s. 166 DPA 2018 if the ICO has issued an outcome letter and the complaint is no longer pending.
Judge McKenna's interpretation of R (Delo) v ICO
Tribunal Rule 8(3)(c) allows for strike out if a claim has no reasonable prospect of success.
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009
Outcomes
The ICO's application to strike out the Notice of Application was allowed.
The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction under s. 166 DPA 2018 because the ICO had issued an outcome letter, and the appeal had no reasonable prospects of success.