Rabbi Gabriel Kanter-Webber v The Information Commissioner & Anor
[2024] UKFTT 90 (GRC)
Gabriel Kanter-Webber v Information Commissioner & Anor
30 July 2024
[2024] UKFTT 699 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone asked for a recording of a public teacher misconduct hearing. The government refused because it would endanger vulnerable witnesses. The court agreed, saying that releasing a summary of the decision was enough to be transparent.
Key Facts
- •Gabriel Kanter-Webber requested a recording of Joshua Sutcliffe's evidence from a public Teaching Regulatory Agency (TRA) misconduct hearing.
- •The Department for Education (DfE) refused the request, citing FOIA exemptions.
- •The Information Commissioner upheld the DfE's refusal.
- •Kanter-Webber appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber).
- •The hearing was public, but recording was prohibited.
Legal Principles
Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) exemptions, specifically sections 31, 36, 38, and 40.
FOIA
Data Protection Act 2018
Data Protection Act 2018
Public interest test balancing transparency and protection of vulnerable witnesses.
FOIA and Case Law
Prior publication does not preclude the engagement of an exemption upon later publication.
Morton v IC & Wigan MBC [2018] UKUT 295 (AAC)
The opinion of a qualified person under s36 FOIA is afforded a measure of respect but is not conclusive.
IC v Malnick and ACOBA (GIA/447/2017)
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The Tribunal found that the DfE's refusal to release the recording was justified under FOIA exemptions 31, 36, 38, and 40. The public interest in protecting vulnerable witnesses outweighed the public interest in disclosure. The publication of a detailed decision already met the transparency requirement.