Jefferson Moutinho Arnauth v The Information Commissioner
[2023] UKFTT 217 (GRC)
Graham Nightingale v The Information Commissioner
5 January 2024
[2024] UKFTT 19 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone complained to the ICO, who responded. The person then appealed to a Tribunal. The Tribunal said it couldn't help because the ICO had already done something, and threw out the appeal.
Key Facts
- •Applicant appealed to the Tribunal under s. 166 of the Data Protection Act 2018 concerning a letter from the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO).
- •The application was made out of time.
- •The Registrar refused an extension of time and struck out the appeal.
- •The Applicant requested a judicial reconsideration.
- •The ICO had responded to the complaint over a year prior to the application and again recently.
Legal Principles
The Tribunal's powers under s. 166 DPA 2018 are limited to situations where the ICO has failed to progress a complaint.
Data Protection Act 2018, s. 166(2)
The Tribunal has no supervisory jurisdiction over the ICO's handling of complaints; it cannot review the ICO's decision to take no further action.
Case law from the Upper Tribunal, High Court, and Court of Appeal
A case can be struck out if it has no reasonable prospects of success.
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009, rule 8(3)(c)
Outcomes
Permission to proceed out of time was refused.
Granting permission would lead to immediate strike out for lack of merit.
The Notice of Application was struck out.
The ICO responded to the complaint, and the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to grant the requested relief; the application has no reasonable prospects of success.