S Hussain v The Information Commissioner
[2023] UKFTT 950 (GRC)
Sajad Hussain v The Information Commissioner
30 August 2024
[2024] UKFTT 796 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone asked for a council's phone book. The council and the Information Commissioner hid some names and phone numbers for privacy reasons. A court said most of the complaints were invalid, but the question of whether hiding the names was lawful will be decided later.
Key Facts
- •Sajad Hussain appealed the Information Commissioner's decision to redact personal data from a City of Bradford Metropolitan Borough Council telephone directory.
- •Hussain's initial appeal alleged a 'cover-up' and collusion between the ICO and the local authority.
- •The Information Commissioner applied to strike out the appeal under Rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009.
- •Hussain raised additional grounds of appeal related to Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Article 6(f) of the UK GDPR (balancing test for personal data disclosure).
- •The Tribunal considered the applicability of Section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and Section 3(2) of the Data Protection Act 2018 in relation to the definition of 'personal data'.
Legal Principles
Rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 allows striking out an appeal with no reasonable prospect of success.
Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009
Section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 exempts personal data of individuals other than the requester if disclosure breaches data protection principles.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Section 3(2) of the Data Protection Act 2018 defines personal data as 'any information relating to an identified or identifiable living individual'.
Data Protection Act 2018
Article 5(1) and Article 6(f) of the UK GDPR outline data protection principles, including lawful, fair, and transparent processing, and a balancing test for legitimate interests.
UK GDPR
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), concerning freedom of expression, does not extend to a right of access to information beyond that provided by FOIA, as per *Moss v Information Commissioner and the Cabinet Office* [2020] UKUT 242 (AAC).
*Moss v Information Commissioner and the Cabinet Office* [2020] UKUT 242 (AAC)
Outcomes
The appeal was partially struck out.
Grounds alleging a cover-up and relying on Article 10 ECHR were deemed to have no reasonable prospect of success. The ground focusing on the balancing test under Article 6(f) UK GDPR regarding the disclosure of personal data was allowed to proceed.