Graham Garner v Shardlow & Great Wilne Parish Council
[2023] UKFTT 1067 (GRC)
Fiona Watmore & Anor v Witherley Parish Council
21 May 2024
[2024] UKFTT 395 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
A parish council didn't fully answer information requests, breaking a court order. The court found them guilty of contempt but decided against further punishment because they eventually followed the order and apologized. This shows how important it is to obey court orders, but also that courts can be flexible.
Key Facts
- •Fiona Watmore and Helen Bullivant (Applicants) made Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to Witherley Parish Council (Council).
- •The Council's responses were deemed inadequate, leading to complaints to the Information Commissioner.
- •The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) initially allowed the appeals, finding the Commissioner's decisions erroneous and issuing a Substituted Decision Notice (SDN).
- •The SDN directed the Council to issue fresh responses to the information requests within a specified timeframe.
- •The Council's responses of 28 March 2023 were deemed insufficient, leading to contempt of court applications by the Applicants.
- •The Council admitted non-compliance but attributed the failures to poor working practices of the previous administration.
- •All Parish Councillors except Bullivant resigned, creating an inquorate council.
- •The FTT found the Council in contempt of court but decided not to certify the offence to the Upper Tribunal due to subsequent compliance and apology.
Legal Principles
Enforcement of FTT decisions and power to punish non-compliance.
Information Commissioner v Moss and the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames [2020] UKUT 174 (AAC)
FTT jurisdiction to certify contempt to the Upper Tribunal under section 61 FOIA.
Section 61 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
Two-stage process for certifying contempt: (1) determining if the act/omission would constitute contempt in a court; (2) exercising discretion to certify to the Upper Tribunal.
Section 61 FOIA and Rule 7A Tribunal Rules
Burden of proof for contempt is beyond reasonable doubt; circumstantial evidence can be used, but inferences must be cogent and reliable.
JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshlenniy Bank v Pugachev [2016] EWHC 192 (Ch)
Importance of complying with tribunal orders, similar to court orders; proportionality of contempt orders.
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council v Harron & The Information Commissioner [2023] UKUT 22 (AAC)
Principles for deciding whether to treat a person as a contemnor (clear and unambiguous order, proper notice, clear breach, proportionality, etc.).
Navigator Equities Limited v Deripaska [2021] EWCA Civ 1799
Outcomes
The Application in EJ/2023/0002 is refused.
The Council's failure to comply with the SDN constituted contempt, but the FTT exercised its discretion not to certify due to subsequent compliance, apology, and the disproportionate nature of certification.
The Application in EJ/2023/0003 is refused.
Same as above.