Keith Vernon Gell v Information Commissioner & Anor
[2024] UKFTT 329 (GRC)
Edward Carter v The Information Commissioner & Ors
24 January 2024
[2024] UKFTT 72 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone asked for a list of companies paying business rates and where. The councils said no because it would help fraudsters. The court agreed, saying the risk of fraud outweighed the public benefit of releasing the information, even though similar information is already available elsewhere.
Key Facts
- •Two appeals were heard together: one against the City of London Corporation (CoL) and one against Westminster City Council (WCC), both concerning Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) requests.
- •The appellant, Mr. Carter, requested a list of companies paying business rates, the hereditaments they were liable for, and their property reference numbers (PRNs).
- •The Councils refused the requests, relying on sections 31(1)(a) (prejudice to crime prevention), 41 (confidential information), 12 (cost of compliance), and 14 (vexatious request) of the FOIA.
- •The Information Commissioner upheld the Councils' refusal, finding that section 31(1)(a) was engaged and the public interest favored withholding the information.
- •The appeals argued that section 41 wasn't engaged, section 31(1)(a) was wrongly applied, the public interest favored disclosure, and section 12 and 14 were wrongly invoked.
Legal Principles
Section 31(1)(a) FOIA provides a qualified exemption if disclosure would prejudice the prevention of crime. A public interest test applies.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Section 41 FOIA provides an absolute exemption for information obtained in confidence, unless disclosure is in the public interest.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Section 12 FOIA allows a public authority to refuse a request if the cost of compliance exceeds the appropriate limit (£450).
Freedom of Information Act 2000 and Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004
Section 14 FOIA allows a public authority to refuse a vexatious request.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1969] RPC 41 establishes the three-part test for breach of confidence.
Case Law
The test for vexatious requests considers burden on the authority, requester's motive, value of the request, and harassment or distress caused.
Dransfield case law
Outcomes
The appeals were dismissed.
The Tribunal found that releasing the requested information would likely prejudice crime prevention by weakening the Councils' security systems, even though much of the information was already publicly available. The public interest in preventing fraud outweighed the limited public interest in disclosure.