Jon Austin v Information Commissioner & Anor
[2023] UKFTT 595 (GRC)
Jenna Corderoy v Information Commissioner & Anor
29 July 2024
[2024] UKFTT 698 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
A journalist wanted to see social media posts from police officers who got in trouble. The police didn't want to release them to protect people's privacy. The court mostly agreed with the police, but said some of the information *should* have been released.
Key Facts
- •Jenna Corderoy, a journalist, requested information from the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) regarding police officers disciplined or dismissed for misconduct on social media.
- •The request sought the number of officers, brief descriptions of incidents, and copies of offensive messages/posts.
- •The MPS partially disclosed information but withheld details citing exemptions under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) and the UK GDPR.
- •Corderoy appealed the Information Commissioner's decision to the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber).
- •The Tribunal reviewed redacted and unredacted material, considering the application of FOIA sections 40(2)(3A)(a), 30, and 38, and Articles 5 and 6 of the UK GDPR.
Legal Principles
Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) – Section 40(2)(3A)(a) exemption for personal data
FOIA
UK GDPR – Principles relating to processing of personal data (Article 5)
UK GDPR
FOIA – Section 30 exemption for investigations and proceedings
FOIA
FOIA – Section 38 exemption for health and safety
FOIA
Three-stage test for legitimate interests under Article 6(1)(f) UK GDPR: Legitimate interest, necessity, and balancing test
UK GDPR and Case law
Outcomes
Appeal allowed in part.
The Tribunal found the Information Commissioner's decision to withhold all undisclosed information was partially incorrect. While upholding the MPS's right to withhold much of the information under s.40(2)(3A)(a) due to concerns over identifiability of individuals and the potential breach of data protection principles, the Tribunal found some of the redactions were unjustified.