G Brida v Information Commissioner
[2024] UKFTT 10 (GRC)
Reuben Kirkham v Information Commissioner
13 October 2023
[2023] UKFTT 833 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone asked to see documents from 11 cases where the Information Commissioner had asked for cases to be thrown out. The judge agreed to share the documents because open justice (the public being able to see how decisions are made) is important, even if it means a bit more work. The judge didn't like the personal attacks on lawyers and themselves, but still thought it best that the public could see how the cases were decided.
Key Facts
- •Dr. Reuben Kirkham (Appellant) applied for disclosure of documents from 11 appeals (EA/2022/0243, EA/2022/0096, EA/2022/0212, EA/2022/0211, EA/2022/0235, EA/2022/0319, EA/2022/0326, EA/2022/0377, EA/2022/0290, EA/2022/0263, EA/2022/0292) handled by the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber).
- •The appeals involved Information Commissioner strike-out applications under rule 8 of the Tribunal Rules.
- •The Appellant was not a party to the original appeals but argued errors of law and potential misconduct.
- •The Information Commissioner (Respondent) refused consent to disclosure.
- •The Appellant challenged the Tribunal's composition and sought the judge's recusal.
- •Amicus curiae, Maurice Frankel OBE, supported the Appellant's case highlighting the difficulties faced by unrepresented individuals.
Legal Principles
Tribunal composition for Information Rights proceedings and disclosure applications.
Practice direction “Composition of the First-tier Tribunal in relation to matters that fall to be decided by the General Regulatory Chamber” (19 May 2023)
Test for judicial recusal: real danger of bias.
Rv Gough [1993] AC 646
Robust approach to recusal applications; discouraging parties from seeking disqualification to influence the outcome.
Locabail (UK) LTD v Bayfield Properties LTD [1999] EWCA Civ 3004
Open justice principle: balancing the purpose of open justice with potential harm and costs.
Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring [2019] UKSC 38
Open justice as a fundamental principle; balancing efficiency with transparency.
Barings plc v Coopers & Lybrand [2000] 1 WLR 2353
Outcomes
The application for disclosure is allowed.
The Tribunal found that disclosure of the strike-out applications and appellant submissions served the open justice principle by enabling scrutiny of the judicial process, particularly considering the accessibility of modern technology and the relative simplicity of the disclosure request compared to the complexities in *Dring*. The Tribunal also rejected the personal attacks against the Commissioner's solicitors and the judge.