Key Facts
- •Kate Sharp (Appellant) requested correspondence between Herefordshire Council (Respondent) and Councillor X regarding a planning application.
- •The Information Commissioner (Respondent) upheld the Council's refusal to disclose information, citing personal data protection under Regulation 13(1) EIR and Article 5(1)(a) GDPR.
- •The Appellant appealed, arguing a legitimate interest in knowing if Councillor X used their position to influence the application.
- •The Tribunal considered the Council's policies on publishing planning representations and Councillor X's reasonable expectation of privacy.
- •The Tribunal found that some information constituted representations subject to public disclosure, while other information was private.
Legal Principles
Data protection principles under Article 5(1)(a) GDPR (personal data shall be processed lawfully, fairly, and transparently).
GDPR
Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR), specifically Regulations 5, 12, and 13, regarding access to environmental information and exceptions for personal data.
EIR
Article 6 GDPR outlines lawful bases for data processing, including legitimate interests, but subject to the data subject's fundamental rights.
GDPR
Outcomes
Appeal ALLOWED.
The Tribunal found that some information constituted representations subject to public disclosure under Council policy, outweighing Councillor X's privacy rights. Other information was deemed private and its disclosure unlawful.
Substituted Decision Notice issued.
Herefordshire Council must disclose specified redacted portions of email exchanges between Councillor X and Council officers. The redactions protect Councillor X's personal data (name, email address, contact details) but release information considered public representations.