Claire Stretton v The Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead & Anor
[2023] UKFTT 1051 (GRC)
Stephen Donkin v Sunderland City Council
8 August 2024
[2024] UKFTT 727 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone sued a council for not following a court order about a Freedom of Information request. The court threw out the case because the original order wasn't clear enough about deadlines and there was an easier way to resolve the problem.
Key Facts
- •Stephen Donkin appealed an Information Commissioner's decision upholding Sunderland City Council's response to his Freedom of Information Act request.
- •The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the Council to reconsider its analysis and conduct further searches.
- •Donkin subsequently applied to the Tribunal for certification of contempt of court against the Council for non-compliance.
- •The Council provided a fresh response, but Donkin argued it was insufficient.
- •The Tribunal considered striking out the application due to lack of reasonable prospects of success and the availability of an alternative remedy via the ICO.
Legal Principles
A tribunal can strike out proceedings if there's no reasonable prospect of success.
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009, Rule 8(3)(c)
The First-tier Tribunal has jurisdiction to certify contempt of court related to its proceedings under section 61 FOIA.
Section 61, Freedom of Information Act 2000
In contempt proceedings, the burden of proof is on the applicant to demonstrate the offence beyond reasonable doubt.
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council v Harron, Pugachev
The tribunal must consider whether to exercise its discretion to certify contempt, considering factors such as intentionality and proportionality.
Nield v Loveday, Navigator Equities Limited v Deripaska
When deciding whether to certify contempt, the tribunal should consider whether the order was clear, the respondent had notice, and the breach is clear.
Navigator Equities Limited v Deripaska
Tribunals must clearly state requirements and consequences of non-compliance.
MD v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
The discretion to grant permission for committal proceedings should be exercised cautiously, requiring a strong prima facie case and considering the public interest and proportionality.
Kirk v Walton
Outcomes
The application for certification of contempt was struck out.
The Tribunal found no reasonable prospect of success due to several factors: the lack of a compliance date in the Substituted Decision Notice; the absence of a statement of consequences for non-compliance; the availability of an alternative remedy through the ICO; and the Tribunal's view that the Council's actions, while not fully compliant, did not meet the threshold for contempt.