Mark Bill v The Information Commissioner
[2023] UKFTT 669 (GRC)
Robert Moss v The Information Commissioner
13 July 2023
[2023] UKFTT 609 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone appealed a decision that the government didn't have to release some information. The judge threw out the appeal because the appeal didn't argue against the law used to refuse the information, only that the information should have been released. The judge said the appeal wasn't worth a full hearing.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against the Information Commissioner's Decision Notice dated 20 February 2023.
- •Decision Notice concluded that the public authority correctly relied on s. 14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
- •Appellant's grounds of appeal focused on the strength of his disclosure application, not on legal errors in the Decision Notice.
- •Information Commissioner applied to strike out the appeal under rule 8(3)(c) for lacking reasonable prospects of success.
- •Appellant failed to explain why the Decision Notice was wrong in law.
Legal Principles
An application to strike out in the FTT under rule 8(3)(c) 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 ss. 57 and 58 of FOIA is to decide whether there is an error of law or inappropriate exercise of discretion in the Information Commissioner's Decision Notice.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Section 14(1) FOIA allows a public authority to refuse a request for information in certain circumstances.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Outcomes
Appeal struck out.
The appeal had no reasonable prospects of success because it did not challenge the legal conclusion of the Decision Notice that s. 14(1) FOIA applied.