Department of Work and Pensions v The Information Commissioner
[2024] UKFTT 334 (GRC)
Trevor Lee Oakley v Information Commissioner
18 April 2024
[2024] UKFTT 315 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone asked the government for policies about stopping people filming in job centers to gather evidence. The government said they didn't have any more info than what they already gave. A judge looked at everything and agreed with the government, saying the government searched well enough and didn't hide anything.
Key Facts
- •Trevor Lee Oakley appealed a decision of the Information Commissioner regarding a Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) request to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
- •The request sought DWP policies on the use of force to prevent filming on DWP premises for evidence collection, and related offences.
- •The DWP conducted searches and consultations, claiming no further information existed.
- •The Appellant argued the DWP's searches were inadequate and that policies on evidence collection must exist given the DWP's enforcement role.
- •The Respondent maintained that the DWP held no additional information within the scope of the request.
Legal Principles
In FOIA requests, the standard of proof is the balance of probabilities.
FOIA section 58
The Tribunal considers the quality of the public authority's analysis, the scope and rigour of the search, and whether other materials point to further undisclosed information.
Bromley v the Information Commissioner and the Environment Agency (EA/2006/0072)
The Information Commissioner is entitled to accept a public authority's word unless there's evidence of inadequate search, reluctance to search, or a motive to withhold information.
Oates v Information Commissioner and Architects Registration Board EA/2011/0138
The Tribunal may review findings of fact on which a decision notice was based.
FOIA section 58(2)
Outcomes
The appeal was dismissed.
The Tribunal found that the DWP's searches were reasonable and proper, and there was no evidence to suggest further information was held. The disclosed documents were deemed comprehensive.