Graham Garner v Shardlow & Great Wilne Parish Council
[2023] UKFTT 1067 (GRC)
Gary Spiers v Garstang Medical Practice
30 January 2024
[2024] UKFTT 92 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
A doctor sued his GP practice for not fully responding to an information request. The judge ruled the practice gave enough information, even though it wasn't exactly what the doctor wanted. The judge said the practice didn't break any rules.
Key Facts
- •Dr. Gary Spiers requested information from Garstang Medical Practice under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
- •The Practice deemed the request vexatious and refused it.
- •Spiers appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (FTT), which overturned the Practice's decision.
- •The FTT ordered the Practice to provide the requested information by a specified date.
- •Spiers alleged the Practice failed to comply and applied to the FTT to certify a contempt of court.
- •The FTT considered whether the Practice's actions constituted contempt and whether to certify it to the Upper Tribunal.
Legal Principles
The FTT, not the Information Commissioner, enforces its decisions.
Information Commissioner v Moss and the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames [2020] UKUT 174 (AAC)
There's no power to compel compliance with a substituted decision notice, but certifying contempt can incentivize it.
None specified in document
To certify contempt, the FTT must find an act or omission that would constitute contempt if before a court with contempt powers.
Section 61 FOIA, Rule 7A of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009
A court order must be clear, certain, and unambiguous to found a contempt finding.
Harris v Harris [2001] 2 FLR 895
Contempt applications must be proportionate and for legitimate purposes, not improper collateral ones.
Navigator Equities Ltd & another v Deripaska [2021] EWCA Civ 1799
The burden of proof in contempt cases is on the applicant, to the criminal standard.
JSC Mezhdunarodniy Promyshellnniy Bank v Pugachev [2016] EWHC 192 (Ch)
The FTT should consider all circumstances when deciding whether contempt certification is proportionate.
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council v Harron [2023] UKUT 22 (AAC)
The Tribunal's jurisdiction in FOIA appeals is limited to the Commissioner's decision notice.
Birkett v Defra and IC [2012] AACR 32
Outcomes
The application to certify contempt was refused.
The FTT found the Practice substantially complied with its order by providing the relevant contract before the deadline. The request was for information held on a specific date, and the Practice provided that information. Further requests for additional information were outside the scope of the original FOIA request and the Tribunal's order.
Similar Cases
Andrew Preston v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police
[2024] UKFTT 1056 (GRC)
Stephen Donkin v Sunderland City Council
[2024] UKFTT 727 (GRC)
Fiona Watmore & Anor v Witherley Parish Council
[2024] UKFTT 395 (GRC)
Claire Stretton v The Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead & Anor
[2023] UKFTT 1051 (GRC)