Key Facts
- •Stephen Campbell requested a draft of the Amyas Morse Loan Charge Review from HM Treasury (HMT) under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
- •HMT initially refused the request, citing section 12 of FOIA (exceeding the £600 cost limit) due to the need to search external contractor's mailboxes.
- •The Information Commissioner upheld HMT's refusal.
- •HMT subsequently found the requested information but provided PDF copies instead of the original Word files.
- •Campbell appealed to the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber).
Legal Principles
FOIA does not oblige a public authority to comply if the estimated cost exceeds £600.
Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004
The public authority's cost estimate must be reasonable (sensible, realistic, supported by cogent evidence).
Kirkham v Information Commissioner [2018] UKUT 126 (AAC)
Costs attributable to time spent on locating, retrieving, and extracting information must be estimated at £25 per person per hour, irrespective of actual cost.
Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004
FOIA entitles a requester to the information itself, not necessarily the original format or the means of its storage.
Smith v Information Commissioner [2022] UKUT 261 (AAC)
Outcomes
The appeal is allowed.
HMT's cost estimate was unreasonable. The Tribunal found that the reliance on section 12 of FOIA was incorrect due to misapplication of the regulations regarding outsourced IT costs and failure to consider alternative sources of the information (document library).
HMT must issue a fresh response.
The fresh response must not rely on section 12 of FOIA and must communicate all data in the requested file, subject to further exemptions.
Providing PDFs was insufficient to comply with the request.
Campbell's request was for the original electronic Word file, not a PDF conversion. While a PDF might suffice in some situations, it does not in this case.