Peter Hayes v The Information Commissioner
[2023] UKFTT 641 (GRC)
Paul John Calvert v The Information Commissioner & Anor
22 June 2023
[2023] UKFTT 542 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone asked the police for information, but the police said it would cost too much to find. The Information Commissioner agreed with the police. The court also agreed with the police, saying the police's estimate of the cost was reasonable, even though the person making the request disagreed.
Key Facts
- •Appellant requested information from Northumbria Police (Second Respondent) about crime classifications and numbers related to a specific incident.
- •Police refused the request under s. 12(1) FOIA (costs limit), estimating the cost would exceed £450.
- •The Information Commissioner (First Respondent) upheld the refusal.
- •Appellant appealed to the Tribunal, arguing the police could have used computer software to search more efficiently.
- •The Tribunal considered evidence from the police, including witness statements from the Head of Information Management.
Legal Principles
Section 12(1) FOIA allows a public authority to refuse a request if the estimated cost exceeds the appropriate limit.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Regulation 4(3) of the Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004 specifies the costs that can be considered in the estimate.
Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004
The Tribunal must consider afresh whether the public authority complied with Part I of FOIA.
Section 58(1) FOIA
The cost estimate must be reasonable and include only costs reasonably expected to be incurred in determining whether information is held, locating it, retrieving it, and extracting it.
Kirkham v Information Commissioner [2018] UKUT 126 (AAC)
Section 16(1) FOIA requires public authorities to offer advice and assistance.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The Tribunal found the police's cost estimate was reasonable, even considering the appellant's claims about the capabilities of the police computer system. The appellant's evidence was deemed insufficient to contradict the police's witness statements.