Peter Whyton v Information Commissioner & Anor
[2022] UKFTT 518 (GRC)
Peter Wailes v The Information Commissioner
25 September 2023
[2023] UKFTT 778 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone requested the name of the person who drew a council plan. The council and the Information Commissioner said no because it's private information. A judge agreed, saying that getting the name of a senior person in charge was enough to know what happened.
Key Facts
- •Peter Wailes requested the name of the person who drew a cycle route drawing from Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
- •The Council refused, citing data protection concerns under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
- •The Information Commissioner upheld the Council's refusal.
- •Wailes appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber).
Legal Principles
Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA)
FOIA
Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA)
DPA
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)
GDPR
Public interest balancing test (FOIA)
FOIA section 2(2)(b)
Necessity for processing personal data (GDPR)
Article 6(1)(f) GDPR
Definition of 'processing' (DPA)
DPA section 3(4)(d)
Definition of 'personal data' (DPA)
DPA section 3(2)
Schedule 2 DPA exemptions
Schedule 2 DPA
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed
The Tribunal found that disclosing the name of the person who compiled the drawing was not necessary to achieve the legitimate interest in transparency and accountability, as the name of a more senior officer had already been provided. The Tribunal also held that the information sought was personal data, and that releasing it would contravene data protection principles.