Jenna Corderoy v The Information Commissioner & Anor
[2024] UKFTT 105 (GRC)
Rights & Security International v Information Commissioner & Anor
15 April 2024
[2024] UKFTT 296 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
A charity asked the government for data on who loses their British citizenship. The government refused, saying it was secret for national security reasons. A judge agreed, keeping the exact reason secret too, because revealing it might also reveal national security information. The government had to pay the charity some money because of a mistake they made.
Key Facts
- •Rights & Security International (RSI) requested information from the Home Office about British nationality deprivation under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
- •The Home Office claimed exemptions under sections 23(1) and 24(1) of FOIA, relating to national security.
- •The Information Commissioner agreed with the Home Office, and RSI appealed.
- •The Tribunal heard evidence in open and closed sessions due to the sensitive nature of the information.
- •The Home Office initially made an inaccurate witness statement, leading to an adjournment and cost award to RSI.
- •The Tribunal considered whether the information was exempt under section 23 or 24 and whether the Home Office could withhold which exemption applied.
Legal Principles
FOIA section 23 affords the widest protection of any exemption and aims to preserve operational secrecy of national security bodies.
Information Commissioner v Malnick [2018] UKUT 72 (AAC); Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis v Information Commissioner & Rosenbaum [2021] UKUT 5 (AAC)
FOIA section 24 requires a public interest balancing test to determine whether exemption is reasonably required for national security purposes.
Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office v Information Commissioner, Williams and Others [2021] UKUT 248
A public authority may mask which exemption (section 23 or 24) applies if the public interest justifies it, requiring a fact and context-specific assessment.
Williams v Information Commissioner [2023] UKFTT 1079 (GRC)
The Tribunal has a full merits appellate jurisdiction in FOIA appeals, giving appropriate weight to the Commissioner's decision.
Information Commissioner v Malnick [2018] UKUT 72 (AAC)
Outcomes
The appeal was dismissed.
The Tribunal found that the requested information was exempt from disclosure under either section 23(1) or 24(1) of FOIA, and that masking which exemption applied was justified in the public interest.
The Home Office was ordered to pay RSI's and the Commissioner's costs relating to the hearing adjournment.
The adjournment was necessitated by an inaccuracy in the Home Office's witness statement.