Marco Tullio Suadoni v The Information Commissioner & Anor
[2024] UKFTT 56 (GRC)
Mark James v The Information Commissioner & Anor
21 February 2023
[2023] UKFTT 165 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone requested vaccine data, but the government said too many similar requests were made, so they refused. A court agreed the government's refusal was valid, and threw out the appeal because the requestor didn't actually challenge the reason for refusal.
Key Facts
- •Mark James appealed a decision by the Information Commissioner upholding the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency's (MHRA) refusal of an information request.
- •The request concerned quantitative risk assessment data on Covid-19 vaccines.
- •The Information Commissioner found that the MHRA was entitled to refuse the request under section 14 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) due to a targeted campaign involving 292 similar requests in a short period.
- •The Appellant's grounds of appeal argued that the MHRA was hiding information and that the number of similar requests was irrelevant.
Legal Principles
An application to strike out under rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal's rules should be considered similarly to an application under CPR 3.4 in civil proceedings.
HMRC v Fairford Group (in liquidation) and Fairford Partnership Limited (in liquidation) [2014] UKUT 0329 (TCC)
The Tribunal's role under sections 57 and 58 FOIA is to decide whether there is an error of law or inappropriate exercise of discretion in the Information Commissioner's Decision Notice.
FOIA 2000
Section 14 FOIA allows refusal of requests where complying would impose an undue burden.
FOIA 2000
Outcomes
The appeal was struck out.
The appeal had no reasonable prospect of success as the grounds did not engage with the Tribunal's jurisdiction and failed to challenge the Information Commissioner's finding that the request was part of a concerted campaign.