Robert Moss v The Information Commissioner
[2023] UKFTT 609 (GRC)
Dr. Saim Koksal v The Information Commissioner
21 February 2023
[2023] UKFTT 163 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone appealed a decision about not getting some information. Their complaint was about how the government office handled things, not the actual decision itself. The judge said the appeal was pointless because they were complaining about the wrong thing, and threw it out.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against Information Commissioner's Decision Notice (6 October 2022) that information requested was exempt from disclosure under s. 21 FOIA 2000.
- •Applicant's grounds for appeal criticised the Financial Conduct Authority and the Information Commissioner's Office's service standards, not the Decision Notice's legal conclusions.
- •Initial appeal struck out by the Registrar under rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal’s Rules.
- •Applicant applied under rule 4(3) for a Judge to reconsider.
Legal Principles
An application to strike out under rule 8(3)(c) should be considered similarly to an application under CPR 3.4 in civil proceedings.
HMRC v Fairford Group [2014] UKUT 0329 (TCC)
The Tribunal only has the statutory powers conferred on it by Parliament; it does not determine customer service complaints.
FOIA 2000, sections 57 and 58
Outcomes
Appeal struck out.
The appeal lacked reasonable prospects of success as it failed to engage with the Tribunal's jurisdiction under FOIA 2000. The Applicant's complaints were about the ICO's service, not the legal basis of the Decision Notice.