Key Facts
- •The Royal Mint Limited (RM) refused a Freedom of Information request for the number of Britannia gold, silver, and platinum coins minted yearly from 2013-2021.
- •The Information Commissioner (IC) ordered disclosure; RM appealed.
- •RM argued disclosure would prejudice its commercial interests under section 43(2) FOIA, particularly impacting blank sourcing and market competition.
- •The Tribunal initially lacked sufficient information and requested further evidence from RM.
- •RM provided witness testimony highlighting the limited supply of blanks, the competitive market, and the potential for price increases if the information were disclosed.
- •The Tribunal considered the evidence and the public interest.
Legal Principles
Section 43(2) FOIA: Information is exempt if disclosure would prejudice the commercial interests of any person.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Section 2(2)(b) FOIA: Public interest test – if the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Hogan v Information Commissioner principles for applying the 'prejudice' test under s43(2) FOIA: Identify the interest, establish a causal link between disclosure and prejudice, and assess the likelihood of prejudice.
Hogan v Information Commissioner (EA/2005/0026)
Outcomes
The appeal is allowed.
The Tribunal found a real and significant risk of prejudice to RM's commercial interests, outweighing the public interest in disclosure. The limited supply of blanks, the competitive market, and the potential for competitors (like the US Mint) to exploit the disclosed information were key factors.
Substituted Decision Notice: RM is entitled to rely on the exemption in s43(2) FOIA.
Disclosure would likely lead to increased blank prices or loss of market share due to competitors gaining access to commercially sensitive information.