Dr Chrisostomos Prodromou v The Information Commissioner
[2024] UKFTT 483 (GRC)
Kudeep Singh v The Information Commissioner
29 November 2023
[2023] UKFTT 1002 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
A student repeatedly annoyed a university after a fee dispute. He made a freedom of information request, but the Information Commissioner and the Tribunal said it was just a way to bother the university, not a genuine request for information. The university didn't have to answer the request.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against the Information Commissioner's decision that the University of Hertfordshire was entitled to refuse a FOIA request under section 14(1) (vexatious requests).
- •Appellant had an ongoing dispute with the University since 2016 concerning late fee payments.
- •FOIA request sought information on whether the University had under-reported fees on student CAS forms to secure visa approvals.
- •Appellant possessed a letter (CAS/tier 4 letter) suggesting such practices before making the request.
- •Commissioner found the request vexatious due to the appellant's history of numerous FOIA requests, complaints, and legal actions against the University.
- •The Tribunal considered the appellant's motive, the burden on the University, and the value/purpose of the request.
Legal Principles
Section 14(1) of the FOIA allows refusal of vexatious requests.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
The test is whether the request is vexatious, not whether the requester is vexatious. 'Vexatious' carries its ordinary meaning within the FOIA context.
Dransfield v Information Commissioner & Devon County Council [2015] EWCA Civ 454; CP v Information Commissioner [2016] UKUT 427 (AAC)
Relevant factors in determining vexatiousness include: burden on the public authority; requester's motive; value/serious purpose of the request; harassment or distress caused.
Dransfield v Information Commissioner & Devon County Council [2015] EWCA Civ 454; CP v Information Commissioner [2016] UKUT 427 (AAC)
A holistic approach is required, considering the context and history of dealings between the requester and the public authority. The lack of a reasonable foundation for the request is a starting point, but not the sole factor.
Dransfield v Information Commissioner & Devon County Council [2015] EWCA Civ 454; CP v Information Commissioner [2016] UKUT 427 (AAC)
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The Tribunal found the request vexatious, concluding that the burden on the University was disproportionate to the value or purpose of the request given the appellant's history of interactions with the University and his apparent improper motive (retaliation).