West Midlands Ambulance Service (Health): ICO 20 Jan 2021

The complainant has requested the agendas, minutes and other information associated with specific meetings on particular dates. West Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust (‘the Trust’) provided some information and its position is that it does not hold any further information falling within scope of the request. The complainant disputes this. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: On the balance of probabilities, the Trust does not hold any further information within the scope of the complainant’s request and has complied with section 1(1)(a) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the Trust to take any remedial steps.
FOI 1: Complaint not upheld

Citations:

[2021] UKICO IC-43267

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.658022

NHS Digital (Health): ICO 20 Jan 2021

The complainant has requested information relating to the formulation and publication of the Data Protection Impact Assessment for the process by which GPs share Covid-19 data. NHS Digital withheld some information and relied on section 22 of the FOIA to do so. It refused the remainder of the request and relied on section 12 of the FOIA to do so. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS Digital was entitled to rely on section 12 of the FOIA to refuse the request. However, NHS Digital failed to provide meaningful advice and assistance to help the complainant refine his request within the cost limit. NHS Digital therefore breached section 16 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires NHS Digital to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide the complainant with meaningful advice and assistance to assist him in refining his request so that it falls within the cost limit.
FOI 16: Complaint upheld FOI 12: Complaint not upheld

Citations:

[2021] UKICO IC-48274

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.658003

Queen Mary University of London (Education (University)): ICO 18 Mar 2015

The complainant has requested information from Queen Mary University of London (QMUL) regarding the timing of changes to the PACE Trial recovery criteria. QMUL has refused the request on the basis that it is vexatious, citing FOIA section 14(1). The Commissioner’s decision is that QMUL has correctly applied the vexatious provision at section 14(1) of the FOIA. He notes however that the response was provided outside of the statutory time limit of 20 working days and therefore QMUL has breached section 17(5) of the FOIA. He does not require QMUL to take any further steps.
FOI 14: Not upheld FOI 17: Upheld

Citations:

[2015] UKICO FS50558352

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 08 August 2022; Ref: scu.555245

McGuffick v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc: ComC 6 Oct 2009

Requirements for Enforcing Consumer Loan Agreement

The claimant challenged the validity of a loan agreement with his bank as a regulated consumer credit agreement. After default, the lender failed to satisfy a request for a copy of the agreement under section 77. The bank said that though it could not enforce the agreement, it remained valid and that default would be reported to credit reference agencies. The court was asked whether during a period when the agreement was unenforceable for non-compliance, the debt was extinguished/suspended or continued and what steps were available to the bank.
Held: The House of Lords in Wilson had left this situation unclear, and the conflicting judgements were issued without full citation of the case law. The effect of unenforceability under section 65 is that the rights of the creditor and corresponding liability or obligations of the debtor do exist but are unenforceable, rather than that those rights were never acquired or that the creditor was deprived of those rights whilst the agreement was unenforceable.
The 1974 Act did not make clear what was meant by enforcement, but reference to credit reference agencies was said by the claimant to be coercive. Steps up to and including applications to court for permission to enforce such an agreement did not themselves amount to enforcement.
The 2008 regulations were not enforceable by private action.

The claimant had objected under the 1998 Act to the continued holding of information regarding his account. That claim failed: ‘There is simply no basis for the contention that the data is not being processed fairly and lawfully. The processing of the data by sharing it with other financial institutions through the CRAs, pursuant to the Principles of Reciprocity, is clearly in the legitimate interests of the bank, the CRAs and other financial institutions, for all of whom the governing principle is that the sharing of data has the aim of promoting responsible lending.’

Judges:

Flaux J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 2386 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974, Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, Directive 2005/29EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices., Data Protection Act 1998 10(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedWilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its . .
CitedTaylor v Great Eastern Railway Company 1901
The section provided that: ‘A contract for the sale of any goods of the value of ten pounds or upwards shall not be enforceable by action unless the buyer shall accept part of the goods so sold, and actually receive the same, or give something in . .
CitedRankine v American Express Services Europe Ltd 2009
The court considered the enforcement of a contract which offended the 1974 Act.
Held: The bringing of proceedings is only a step taken with a view to enforcement and not actually enforcement. . .
CitedEastern Distributors Limited v Goldring (Murphy, Third Party) CA 1957
The court considered the meaning of the phrase: ‘shall not be entitled to enforce’ in the section.
Held: ‘How is the present case affected by the fact that the hire-purchase agreement is unenforceable? If the Act said that it was void, then of . .
CitedVTB-VAB v Total Belgium NV; Galatea BVBA v Sanoma Magazines Belgium NV ECJ 21-Oct-2008
ECJ (Approximation of Laws) Opinion – Admissibility of a reference for a preliminary ruling – Proper subject of interpretation Relevance to the decision Combined offers – Directive 2005/29/EC – Interpretation in . .
CitedConister Trust Ltd v John Hardman and Co CA 21-Jul-2008
The court was asked whether an agreement by the defendant solicitors under a personal injury litigation funding scheme, to discharge a client’s ‘remaining liability’ under a loan agreement applies on its true construction where the loan agreement is . .
CitedOrakpo v Manson Investments Ltd HL 1977
Transactions were entered into under which loans were made to enable the borrower to acquire and develop certain properties were held to be unenforceable under the 1927 Act. The effect was to enrich the borrower, who had fallen into arrears of . .
CitedRegina v Modupe CACD 1991
The appellant obtained loans enabling him to buy cars by giving false information when entering into hire purchase agreements. The relevant agreement did not contain all the prescribed information and was improperly executed so that by virtue of . .

Cited by:

CitedCarey v HSBC Bank plc, Yunis v Barclays Bank plc and similar QBD 23-Dec-2009
(Manchester Mercantile Court) The court considered the effects in detail where a bank was unable to comply with a request under section 78 of the 1974 Act to provide a copy of the agreement signed by the client.
Held: The court set out to give . .
CitedDoyle v PRA Group (UK) Ltd CA 23-Jan-2019
Whether the cause of action for the outstanding sums accrued when Mr Doyle first defaulted in his payments or only when Mr Doyle failed to comply with the default notice stipulated by CCA s.87(1) and required by clause 8f of the Agreement. Mr Doyle . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Banking, Information

Updated: 08 August 2022; Ref: scu.375741

Various Claimants v WM Morrisons Supermarket Plc: QBD 1 Dec 2017

The defendant employer had had confidential information of many of its staff taken and disclosed by a rogue employee. The employees now sought compensation. The main issue was whether the company was directly or vicariously liable for the tort.
Held: The company were not directly liable, but were liable vicariously: ‘Adopting the broad and evaluative approach encouraged by Lord Toulson JSC in Mohamud’s case [2016] AC 677 I have therefore come to the conclusion that there is a sufficient connection between the position in which Skelton was employed and his wrongful conduct, put into the position of handling and disclosing the data as he was by Morrisons (albeit it was meant to be to KPMG alone), to make it right for Morrisons to be held liable ‘under the principle of social justice which goes back to Holt CJ’.’
The statutes and regulations did not impose direct liability on an employer.

Judges:

Langstaff J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3113 (QB), [2017] WLR(D) 806, [2018] IRLR 200, [2018] EMLR 12, [2018] 3 WLR 691

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Data Protection Act 1998 55, Computer Misuse Act 1990, Parliament and Council Directive 95/46/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedThe Catholic Child Welfare Society and Others v Various Claimants and The Institute of The Brothers of The Christian Schools and Others SC 21-Nov-2012
Law of vicarious liability is on the move
Former children at the children’s homes had sought damages for sexual and physical abuse. The court heard arguments as to the vicarious liability of the Society for abuse caused by a parish priest visiting the school. The Court of Appeal had found . .

Cited by:

See AlsoVarious Claimants v Wm Morrison Supermarkets Plc QBD 16-May-2018
. .
At QBDWm Morrison Supermarkets Plc v Various Claimants CA 22-Oct-2018
Co vicariously liable for employee’s data breach
A member of the company’s staff had unlawfully disclosed personal details of many company employees. The data consisted of personal information of the defendant’s employees including their names, addresses, gender, dates of birth, phone numbers, . .
At QBDWM Morrison Supermarkets Plc v Various Claimants SC 1-Apr-2020
A disgruntled senior employee had divulged on the internet personal details of several thousand employees. The claimants alleged that that had been a breach of the 1998 Act, and that the appellants were vicariously liable for that wrong. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Information, Vicarious Liability, European

Updated: 08 August 2022; Ref: scu.601126

Stroud District Council (Decision Notice): ICO 14 Aug 2012

The complainant requested information regarding planning enforcement issues. Stroud District Council initially relied on the exemption under section 30 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, the exemption relating to investigations and section 12(1), an exclusion relating to costs. Following the Commissioner’s involvement, the council decided to disclose information to the complainant. The only outstanding issue concerned some information that had been withheld using regulation 12(5)(b) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, the exception relating to legal professional privilege, and an allegation made by the complainant that more information may be held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council correctly withheld information using regulation 12(5)(b). On the balance of probabilities, no more information was held. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 12.5.b – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FER0431238

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.529773

Treasury Solicitors (Decision Notice): ICO 19 Oct 2009

The complainant requested that the Treasury Solicitor’s Department provided him with the identity of the individual(s) whose allegations culminated in him being declared a vexatious litigant. TSOL refused to disclose the information on grounds provided by section 30 (investigations and proceedings conducted by public authorities) or, in the alternative, section 31 (law enforcement) of the Act. The Commissioner has concluded that the information is the personal information of the complainant and therefore exempt under section 40(1) of the Act and that the public authority should have treated the request as a subject access request under section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA).
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2009] UKICO FS50127453

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.532258

Sheffield College (Decision Notice): ICO 27 Sep 2011

The complainants requested a number of items of information under the Act about an incident relating to a security barrier. The College failed to provide the relevant recorded information to the complainants within 20 working days. Originally, it explained that it believed that a third party would provide the information to them. The complainants confirmed that they did receive the relevant recorded information, but that they remained concerned about the delays that were experienced. The Commissioner agreed that he would issue a Decision Notice on those delays. He finds that the delays constituted a breach of section 10(1) of the Act. However, he requires no remedial steps in this case as the requested information has already been provided.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2011] UKICO FS50386971

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.530896

Liverpool City Council (Decision Notice): ICO 15 Jan 2013

The complainant requested information from Liverpool City Council about approval by its appointed directors to the board of Liverpool Direct Limited for third party work. The council said that it did not hold the requested information but this statement was not accepted by the complainant. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the requested information is not held and therefore the council responded appropriately to this request. The Commissioner requires no further action to be taken. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2013] UKICO FS50440338

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.527840

Norfolk County Council (Decision Notice): ICO 2 Aug 2012

The complainant has requested from Norfolk County Council (‘the council’) the social care records of his late mother. The council relied on the exemption at section 41(1) of the Freedom of Information Act (‘FOIA’) that the information cannot be disclosed as it would constitute an actionable breach of confidence. During the Commissioners investigation, the council also relied on the exemption for personal data under section 40(2) for part of the requested information and the exemption where disclosure would prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs under section 36(2). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council correctly withheld the information using section 41(1) of the FOIA, apart from some information that represents the complainant’s personal data which ought to have been considered separately in accordance with the rights of subject access provided by the Data Protection Act 1998 (‘the DPA’). Information Tribunal appeal number EA/2012/0182 has been disposed of by way of a consent order.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 41 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50431237

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.529758

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (Decision Notice): ICO 15 Jan 2013

The complainant requested information relating to Bradford Adult Protection Unit. The council provided the information that was held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council dealt with the request in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2013] UKICO FS50462053

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.527794

Guildford Borough Council (Decision Notice): ICO 15 Jan 2013

The complainant has requested information from Guildford Borough Council (the council) from environmental records held on a specific property. The complainant specified that he wished to inspect the information in a similar format to that inspected by council searchers, but if this was not possible, in any reasonable format that is easily accessible. The council provided some information and stated that if other information was held, it was publicly available and therefore it considered that it was reasonable for it to make this information available in a format other than inspection under regulation 6(1)(b). The complainant was also concerned that the information the council had provided access to, was not accurate in accordance with regulation 5(4). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council correctly relied upon regulation 6(1)(b) as it was reasonable for it to make information available in a format other than inspection. He also finds that the council has complied with regulation 5(4). However, the Commissioner finds that the council has breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR as it failed to make the requested information available on request within the statutory time for compliance. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 5 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 5 – Complaint Not upheld, EIR 6 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2013] UKICO FER0445747

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.527822

Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (Decision Notice): ICO 15 Jan 2013

The complainant, having received correspondence from the Council on 2 March 2012 asked a question in relation to this letter regarding the academic and medical qualifications of staff working in its Adult Care Services Department. The Council refused the request on the grounds that it was vexatious citing section 14(1) of the Act. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (‘the Council’ has correctly relied on section 14(1) of the Act and therefore requires no steps. Information Tribunal appeal number EA/2013/0012 withdrawn.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 14 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2013] UKICO FS50449903

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.527879

Brooklands Primary School (Decision Notice): ICO 21 Nov 2013

The complainant made a freedom of information request to Brooklands Primary School for anonymized statistical information on the progress of pupils at the School in reading. The School disclosed most of the information requested but provided a ‘below 3’ response where the number of pupils requested was 0, 1, or 2 so as to reduce the risk of individual pupils being identified. The School relied on the section 40(2) (personal information) exemption and argued that disclosure would contravene the first data protection principle. The Commissioner has investigated the complaint and found that most of the redacted information does not amount to personal data. The Commissioner did find that some information was personal data and that disclosure would contravene the first data protection principle and that therefore this information was exempt under section 40(2) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose to the complainant, in unredacted form, the information it holds falling within the scope of the request of 7 January 2013 with the following exceptions – for table 1, the School may combine the information for ‘number of pupils at 2a and below’ for year 4 and the information for years 1′ 5 from table 6 shall not be disclosed.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 40 – Complaint Partly Upheld

Citations:

[2013] UKICO FS50485593

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.528847

Durham County Council (Decision Notice): ICO 23 Jan 2014

The complainant has requested a copy of the financial models referred to in the County Durham Plan, Preferred Options document. Durham County Council (- the Council) refused the request in reliance of the exception provided by regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied regulation 12(5)(e) to the financial model sought by the complainant and that the public interest favouring withholding the financial model outweighs that favouring its disclosure. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further action in this matter.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 12.5.e – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2014] UKICO FER0490530

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.527339

Salford Primary Care Trust (Decision Notice): ICO 15 Jan 2013

The complainant has requested information relating to the provision of augmentative and alternative communication devices by the NHS. Salford Primary Care Trust (Salford PCT) refused to comply with the request as it said it would exceed the cost limit under section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) to do so. The Commissioner considers that section 12 of FOIA was applied correctly in this case. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 12 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2013] UKICO FS50467120

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.527881

BBC (Decision Notice): ICO 15 Jan 2013

The complainant has requested the number of complaints made against Panorama broadcasts. The BBC explained the information was covered by the derogation and excluded from FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that this information was held by the BBC for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and did not fall inside FOIA. He therefore upholds the BBC’s position and requires no remedial steps to be taken in this case.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2013] UKICO FS50465338

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.527781

Enford Parish Council (Decision Notice): ICO 15 Jan 2013

The complainant requested a tape recording of a parish meeting from Enford Parish Council The council refused to supply the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council breached section 1(1)(a) and (b) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 by failing to state that it held the information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide a copy of the tape recording of the meeting to the complainant unless a valid exemption applies under the FOIA. If an exemption is considered to apply, the authority should issue a refusal notice to the complainant in accordance with the obligations under section 17.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2013] UKICO FS50461919

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.527815

Northern Ireland Housing Executive (Decision Notice): ICO 15 Jan 2013

The complainant has requested information from the Northern Ireland Housing Executive in relation to the service of an NIHE member of staff in relation to several complaints made by the complainant regarding alleged encroachment onto NIHE land by external contractors. The NIHE disclosed the majority of the requested information, however it redacted some details from it citing section 40(2) of FOIA as a basis for non-disclosure. The Commissioner’s decision is that the NIHE has correctly applied section 40(2) (by virtue of section 40(3)(a)(i) of FOIA to the withheld information. He therefore orders no steps to be taken. Information Tribunal appeal number EA/2013/0009 dismissed.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2013] UKICO FS50455072

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.527863

Ian M Irving v Argyll and Bute Council: SIC 28 Jan 2014

SIC On 29 August 2013, Mr Irving asked Argyll and Bute Council (the Council) for the identity of a complainant. The Council withheld the information in terms of regulation 11(2) of the EIRs on the basis that it was personal data, the disclosure of which would breach the first data protection principle.
Following an investigation, the Commissioner accepted that the Council was entitled to withhold the information on this basis.

Citations:

[2014] ScotIC 010 – 2014

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.522698

Gurieva and Another v Community Safety Development (UK) Ltd: QBD 6 Apr 2016

Claim against private investigator, seeking compliance with the 1988 Act, in particular seeking details of personal information held.
Held: ‘The claimants’ SAR is and was valid. There was never any proper basis for questioning its validity. CSD’s failure to disclose any personal data at all represents a breach of the claimants’ rights. The personal data held by CSD that relates to the claimants may include some that is protected by the crime exemption, and some that is protected by litigation privilege, but it has not been proved that all of it is so protected.’
In the context of restricting the subject’s right of access to his personal data: ‘The test of necessity is a strict one, requiring any interference with the subject’s rights to be proportionate to the gravity of the threat to the public interest’

Judges:

Warby J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 643 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Data Protection Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedElgizouli v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Mar-2020
Defendants were to face trial in the US, accused of monstrous crimes. The appellant challenged the release of information to the USA by the respondent to support such prosecutions when the death penalty was a possible outcome of a conviction: ‘The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.562179

Valuation Office Agency (Local Government): ICO 5 Jun 2019

The complainant submitted a request for information in relation to the valuations of specified properties. The public authority withheld the information held within the scope of the request relying on the exemption at section 44(1)(a) FOIA. The Commissioner concluded that the public authority was entitled to rely on section 44(1)(a).
FOI 44(1)(a): Complaint not upheld

Citations:

[2019] UKICO fs50809990

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.638761

Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014

The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act.
Held: The claim failed. As a matter of ordinary common law construction, the construction is clear: section 32 was intended to provide an absolute exemption which would not cease abruptly at the end of the court, arbitration or inquiry proceedings, but would continue until the relevant documents became historical records; that however does not mean that the information held by the Charity Commission as a result of its inquiries may not be required to be disclosed outside section 32 under other statutory and/or common law powers preserved by section 78 of the FOIA. The claim had been argued on the basis that section 32 of the FOIA can and should be read down to have a meaning contrary to that which Parliament clearly intended. It followed that no basis existed for any declaration of incompatibility with article 10 of the Convention.
Lord Toulson said: ‘it was not the purpose of the Human Rights Act that the common law should become an ossuary’.
Orse Kennedy v Information Commissioner (Secretary of State for Justice intervening)

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath, Lord Toulson

Citations:

[2014] UKSC 20, [2015] 1 AC 455, [2014] EMLR 19, [2014] HRLR 14, [2014] WLR(D) 143, [2014] 2 All ER 847, [2014] 2 WLR 808, UKSC 2012/0122

Links:

Bailii, SC, SC Summary

Statutes:

Freedom of Information Act 2000 32(2), Public Records Act 1958 3, Charities Act 1993, Charities Act 2006, European Convention on Human Rights 2 10, Inquiries Act 2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At Information TribunalKennedy v Information Commissioner IT 14-Jun-2009
The claimant sought release of documents placed with the Charity Commission in connection with investigations into a charity.
Held: With certain exceptions, the applicaion failed: ‘once a public authority places documents it held prior to an . .
At AdminKennedy v Information Commissioner Admn 19-Jan-2010
The claimant journalist had made a freedom of information request to the Charity Commission as to its investigations of a charity under section 8 of the 1993 Act. The Commission claimed absolute exemption under section 32(2). He now appealed against . .
Appeal fromKennedy v The Information Commissioner and Another CA 12-May-2011
The claimant, a journalist, sought further information from the Charity Commission after the release of three investigations into the ‘Mariam Appeal’ and questions about the source and use of its funds. The Commission replied that it was exempt . .
CitedGuardian News and Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court CA 3-Apr-2012
The newspaper applied for leave to access documents referred to but not released during the course of extradition proceedings in open court.
Held: The application was to be allowed. Though extradition proceedings were not governed by the Civil . .
CitedAli Shipping Corporation v Shipyard Trogir CA 19-Dec-1997
In the case of an arbitration, there is a strong contractual presumption in favour of confidentiality and against non-disclosure. But this may be overridden by a court where necessary to protect a party’s rights against a third party or in other . .
CitedDepartment of Economic Policy and Development of City of Moscow and Another v Bankers Trust Company and Another CA 25-Mar-2004
The word ‘private’ in rule 39.2 means the same as ‘secret’. Lord Justice Mance said: ‘It may be equated with the old ‘in camera’ procedure, rather than the old ‘in chambers’ procedure.’ Privacy and confidentiality are features long assumed to be . .
CitedDoherty and others v Birmingham City Council HL 30-Jul-2008
The House was asked ‘whether a local authority can obtain a summary order for possession against an occupier of a site which it owns and has been used for many years as a gipsy and travellers’ caravan site. His licence to occupy the site has come to . .
CitedKay And Others v United Kingdom ECHR 17-Oct-2008
. .
CitedManchester City Council v Pinnock SC 3-Nov-2010
The tenant had been secure but had his tenancy had been reduced to an insecure demoted tenancy after he was accused of anti-social behaviour. He had not himself been accused of any misbehaviour, but it was said that he should have controlled his . .
CitedAttorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’) HL 13-Oct-1988
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain
A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations . .
CitedDerbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others HL 18-Feb-1993
Local Council may not Sue in Defamation
Local Authorities must be open to criticism as political and administrative bodies, and so cannot be allowed to sue in defamation. Such a right would operate as ‘a chill factor’ on free speech. Freedom of speech was the underlying value which . .
CitedCrampton v Secretary of State for Health CA 9-Jul-1993
. .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Health, Ex Parte Wagstaff etc QBD 31-Aug-2000
The Secretary of State announced a public enquiry into the Shipman case. He did not say whether it would be a public enquiry. The bereaved families and media wanted it to be public, and contended that it had been invalidly constituted, that an . .
CitedRegina (Persey and Others) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Admn 15-Mar-2002
The applicants sought an order that the government enquiries into the foot and mouth outbreak should be held in public. They argued that the need to re-establish public faith made a decision not to hold the enquiries in public irrational, and that a . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bugdaycay HL 19-Feb-1986
Three applicants had lied on entry to secure admission, stayed for a considerable time, and had been treated as illegal immigrants under section 33(1). The fourth’s claim that upon being returned he would been killed, had been rejected without . .
CitedRegina v Ministry of Defence ex parte Smith; ex parte Grady CA 3-Nov-1995
Four appellants challenged the policy of the ministry to discharge homosexuals from the armed services.
Held: Where a measure affects fundamental rights or has profoundly intrusive effects, the courts will anxiously scrutinise the decision to . .
CitedSmith and Grady v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-Sep-1999
The United Kingdom’s ban on homosexuals within the armed forces was a breach of the applicants’ right to respect for their private and family life. Applicants had also been denied an effective remedy under the Convention. The investigations into . .
CitedRegina (on the Application of Q and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 18-Mar-2003
The Home Secretary appealed a ruling that his implementation of section 55 was unlawful, having been said to be incompatible with human rights law.
Held: The way in which the section had been operated, by denying consideration and all benefits . .
CitedOffice of Fair Trading and others v IBA Health Limited CA 19-Feb-2004
The OFT had considered whether it was necessary to refer a merger between two companies to the Competition Commission, and decided against. The Competition Appeal Tribunal held that the proposed merger should have been referred. The OFT and parties . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Eastside Cheese Company (a Firm) and R A Duckett and Co Interested CA 1-Jul-1999
The respondent had made an order banning the processing of milk products from the interested party’s farm into cheese products. Cheese manufacturers objected to the order. The order had been held unlawful, and the Secretary of State now appealed. . .
CitedSinclair Collis Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Health CA 17-Jun-2011
The claimants sought to challenge the validity of rules brought in under the 2009 Act as to the placement of cigarette vending machines in retail outlets. They said it was a a national measure restricting the free movement of goods. The . .
CitedRegina v Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food and Another Ex Parte First City trading Etc QBD 20-Dec-1996
EU law principles do not apply in domestic law unless implementing EU law. Laws J said that: ‘Wednesbury and European review are two different models – one looser, one tighter -of the same juridical concept, which is the imposition of compulsory . .
CitedLeander v Sweden ECHR 26-Mar-1987
Mr Leander had been refused employment at a museum located on a naval base, having been assessed as a security risk on the basis of information stored on a register maintained by State security services that had not been disclosed him. Mr Leander . .
CitedGaskin v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Jul-1989
The applicant complained of ill-treatment while he was in the care of a local authority and living with foster parents. He sought access to his case records held by the local authority but his request was denied.
Held: The refusal to allow him . .
CitedGuerra and Others v Italy ECHR 19-Feb-1998
(Grand Chamber) The applicants lived about 1km from a chemical factory which produced fertilizers and other chemicals and was classified as ‘high risk’ in criteria set out by Presidential Decree.
Held: Failure by a government to release to an . .
CitedRoche v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Oct-2005
(Grand Chamber) The claimant had been exposed to harmful chemicals whilst in the Army at Porton Down in 1953. He had wished to claim a service pension on the basis of the ensuing personal injury, but had been frustrated by many years of the . .
CitedSecretary of State for Defence v Al-Skeini and others (The Redress Trust Intervening) HL 13-Jun-2007
Complaints were made as to the deaths of six Iraqi civilians which were the result of actions by a member or members of the British armed forces in Basra. One of them, Mr Baha Mousa, had died as a result of severe maltreatment in a prison occupied . .
CitedSecretary of State for the Home Department v AF AN and AE (No 3) HL 10-Jun-2009
The applicants complained that they had been made subject to non-derogating control orders as suspected terrorists, but that the failure to inform them of the allegations or evidence against them was unfair and infringed their human rights. The . .
CitedSmith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening) SC 30-Jun-2010
The deceased soldier died of heat exhaustion whilst on active service in Iraq. It was said that he was owed a duty under human rights laws, and that any coroner’s inquest should be a fuller one to satisfy the state’s duty under Article 2.
CitedRabone and Another v Pennine Care NHS Foundation SC 8-Feb-2012
The claimant’s daughter had committed suicide whilst on home leave from a hospital where she had stayed as a voluntary patient with depression. Her admission had followed a suicide attempt. The hospital admitted negligence but denied that it owed . .
CitedSugar v British Broadcasting Corporation and Another (2) SC 15-Feb-2012
The claimant sought release of a report prepared by the respondent as to its coverage of the Arab/Israel conflict partly for journalistic purposes, and partly for compliance.
Held: The appeal failed. Where the report was prepared even if only . .
CitedSmith and Others v The Ministry of Defence SC 19-Jun-2013
The claimants were PRs of men who had died or were severely injured on active duty in Iraq being variously fired at by mistake by other coalition forces, or dying in vehicles attacked by roadside bombs. Appeals were heard against a finding that the . .
CitedSturnham, Regina (on The Application of) v The Parole Board of England and Wales and Another (No 2) SC 3-Jul-2013
From 4 April 2005 until 3 December 2012, English law provided for the imposition of sentences of imprisonment for public protection (‘IPP’). The Court addressed the practical and legal issues resulting from the new system.
Held: The decision . .
CitedMatky v Czech Republic ECHR 10-Jul-2006
(French Text) Members of an environmental group sought access to the original project documents lodged with a government department. They wanted to compare the plans with revised plans which were currently the subject of an environmental assessment. . .
CitedTarsasag A Szabadsagjogokert v Hungary ECHR 13-Nov-2008
The Hungarian Civil Liberties Union sought access to details of a legal challenge filed by a Hungarian parliamentarian in the Hungarian Constitutional Court concerning the constitutionality of legislative amendments to the Hungarian Criminal Code. . .
CitedKenedi v Hungary ECHR 26-May-2009
(Second Chamber) The applicant historian specialised in the analysis and recording of the secret services of dictatorships, comparative studies of the political police forces of totalitarian regimes and the functioning of Soviet-type States. The . .
CitedGillberg v Sweden ECHR 2-Nov-2010
The applicant, professor in adolescent psychiatry had collected assorted data after having given undertakings to the parents of the children as to its absolute privacy. A sociologist had applied for and been given authority for its release by the . .
CitedShapovalov v Ukraine ECHR 31-Jul-2012
The claimant, a Ukrainian journalist said that he had (contrary to the Ukranian Information Act 1992) been refused access by administrative authorities during the 2004 elections to certain information and meetings. He relied on article 6 because the . .
CitedYouth Initiative For Human Rights v Serbia ECHR 25-Jun-2013
The Court heard of a refusal by the Serbian intelligence agency to provide the complainant with information as to how many people had been the subject of electronic surveillance by the agency. The Serbian Information Commissioner – whose role was to . .
CitedOsterreichische Vereinigung Zur Erhaltung, Starkung Und Schaffung v Austria ECHR 28-Nov-2013
All agricultural and forest land transactions in Austria required approval by local and regional authorities (in the Tyrol, the Tyrol Real Property Transactions Commission), the aim being to preserve land for agriculture and forestry and avoid the . .

Cited by:

CitedSandiford, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs SC 16-Jul-2014
The appellant a British Citizen awaited execution in Singapore after conviction on a drugs charge. The only way she might get legal help for a further appeal would be if she was given legal aid by the respondent. She sought assistance both on Human . .
CitedA v British Broadcasting Corporation (Scotland) SC 8-May-2014
Anonymised Party to Proceedings
The BBC challenged an order made by the Court of Session in judicial review proceedings, permitting the applicant review to delete his name and address and substituting letters of the alphabet, in the exercise (or, as the BBC argues, purported . .
CitedYoussef v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs SC 27-Jan-2016
An Egyptian national, had lived here since 1994. He challenged a decision by the Secretary of State,as a member of the committee of the United Nations Security Council, known as the Resolution 1267 Committee or Sanctions Committee. The committee . .
CitedMichalak v General Medical Council and Others SC 1-Nov-2017
Dr M had successfully challenged her dismissal and recovered damages for unfair dismissal and race discrimination. In the interim, Her employer HA had reported the dismissal to the respondent who continued their proceedings despite the decision in . .
CitedDover District Council v CPRE Kent SC 6-Dec-2017
‘When a local planning authority against the advice of its own professional advisers grants permission for a controversial development, what legal duty, if any, does it have to state the reasons for its decision, and in how much detail? Is such a . .
CitedAhuja v Politika Novine I Magazini Doo and Others QBD 23-Nov-2015
Action for misuse of private information and libel. Application to have set aside leave to serve out of the jurisdiction. The defendant published a newspaper in Serbian, in print in Serbia and online. Though in Serbian, the claimant said that online . .
CitedJalloh, Regina (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department SC 12-Feb-2020
Claim for damages for false imprisonment brought in judicial review proceedings challenging the legality of a curfew imposed upon the claimant, purportedly under paragraph 2(5) of Schedule 3 to the Immigration Act 1971.
Held: The Court of . .
CitedElgizouli v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Mar-2020
Defendants were to face trial in the US, accused of monstrous crimes. The appellant challenged the release of information to the USA by the respondent to support such prosecutions when the death penalty was a possible outcome of a conviction: ‘The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Information, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.523195

Lambeth London Borough Council (Local Government): ICO 4 Jan 2019

The complainant has requested information regarding the procurement of a developer to rejuvenate Lambeth Council’s Town Hall. It relied on regulation 12(5)(e) to withhold some requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that Lambeth Council has not persuaded her that regulation 12(5)(e) allowed it to withhold requested information.
EIR 12(5)(e): Complaint upheld

Citations:

[2019] UKICO fer0719128

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.634885

Lambeth London Borough Council (Local Government): ICO 15 Mar 2019

The complainant requested information in relation to possible renovation works on a property. Relying on regulation 13(5A)(5)(B) the public authority neither confirmed nor denied whether it held the requested information. The Commissioner concluded that the public authority was entitled to rely on regulation 13(5A)(5)(B) as the basis for neither confirming nor denying whether it held the requested information.
EIR 13(5)(a): Complaint not upheld

Citations:

[2019] UKICO fs50779655

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.635080

Department of Health and Social Care (Central Government): ICO 7 Aug 2020

The complainant has requested all reports produced by the National Support Team for the Response to Sexual Violence in 2011/12. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) withheld the information, citing the exemption under section 41 of the FOIA (information provided in confidence). The Commissioner’s decision is that DHSC has correctly engaged section 41(1) to the withheld information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
FOI 41: Complaint not upheld

Citations:

[2020] UKICO fs50824325

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.653815

Valuation Office Agency (Local Government): ICO 16 Apr 2019

The complainant has requested information relating the method by which Farm Parks are valued. The Valuation Office Agency initially refused the request as vexatious but subsequently provided some information. The Commissioner’s decision is that VOA failed to comply with its section 1(1) duties within 20 working days and therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken in respect of this request.
FOI 10: Complaint upheld

Citations:

[2019] UKICO fs50792686

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.638127

Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’): HL 13 Oct 1988

Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain

A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations made. The AG sought to restrain those publications.
Held: A duty of confidence arises when confidential information comes to the knowledge of a person (the confidant) in circumstances where he has notice, or is held to have agreed, that the information is confidential, with the effect that it would be just in all the circumstances that he should be precluded from disclosing the information to others. There would be no point in imposing a duty of confidence in respect of the secrets of the marital bed if newspapers were free to publish those secrets when betrayed to them by the unfaithful partner. When trade secrets are betrayed by a confidant it is usually the third party who exploits the information and it is the activity of the third party that must be stopped.
The court could look to the Convention to help decide how common law should develop. There was in principle no difference between article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights and the English law of confidence. ‘the principle of confidentiality only applies to information to the extent that it is confidential. In particular, once it has entered what is usually called the public domain (which means no more than that the information in question is so generally accessible that, in all the circumstances, it cannot be regarded as confidential) then, as a general rule, the principle of confidentiality can have no application to it.’ and ‘ I conceive it to be my duty, when I am free to do so, to interpret the law in accordance with the obligations of the Crown under [the Convention]. But for present purposes the important words are ‘when I am free to do so’. The sovereign legislator in the United Kingdom is Parliament. If Parliament has plainly laid down the law, it is the duty of the courts to apply it, whether that would involve the Crown in breach of an international treaty or not.’
Lord Griffiths considered the correct approach to the defence of public interest in a copyright action: ‘If Peter Wright owns the copyright in Spycatcher, which I doubt, it seems to me extremely unlikely that any court in this country would uphold his claim to copyright if any newspaper or any third party chose to publish Spycatcher and keep such profits as they might make to themselves. I would expect a judge to say that the disgraceful circumstances in which he wrote and published Spycatcher disentitled him to seek the assistance of the court to obtain any redress: see Glyn v Weston Feature Film Co. [1916] 1 Ch. 261.’ A third limiting principle of the protection afforded by the law of confidence was ‘although the basis of the law’s protection of confidence is that there is a public interest that confidences should be preserved and protected by the law, nevertheless that public interest may be outweighed by some other countervailing public interest which favours disclosure. This limitation may apply, as the learned judge pointed out, to all types of confidential information. It is this limiting principle which may require a court to carry out a balancing operation, weighing the public interest in maintaining confidence against a countervailing public interest favouring disclosure.’
Lord Jauncey said: ‘The courts of the United Kingdom will not enforce copyright claims in relation to every original literary work . . The publication of Spycatcher was against the public interest and was in breach of the duty of confidence which Peter Wright owed to the Crown. His action reeked of turpitude. It is in these circumstances inconceivable that a United Kingdom court would afford to him or his publishers any protection in relation to any copyright which either of them may possess in the book.’
Lord Goff of Chievely said that an obligation of confidence could arise even where the information in question had not been confided by a confider to a confidant: ‘I realise that, in the vast majority of cases, in particular those concerned with trade secrets, the duty of confidence will arise from a transaction or relationship between the parties – often a contract, in which event the duty may arise by reason of either an express or an implied term of that contract. It is in such cases as these that the expressions ‘confider’ and ‘confidant’ are perhaps most aptly employed. But it is well settled that a duty of confidence may arise in equity independently of such cases; and I have expressed the circumstances in which the duty arises in broad terms, not merely to embrace those cases where a third party receives information from a person who is under a duty of confidence in respect of it, knowing that it has been disclosed by that person to him in breach of his duty of confidence, but also to include certain situations, beloved of law teachers – where an obviously confidential document is wafted by an electric fan out of a window into a crowded street, or where an obviously confidential document, such as a private diary, is dropped in a public place, and is then picked up by a passer-by.’
Lord Goff set out three limiting principles for the rights of confidentiality: ‘The first limiting principle (which is rather an expression of the scope of the duty) is highly relevant to this appeal. It is that the principle of confidentiality only applies to information to the extent that it is confidential. In particular, once it has entered what is usually called the public domain (which means no more than that the information in question is so generally accessible that, in all the circumstances, it cannot be regarded as confidential) then, as a general rule, the principle of confidentiality can have no application to it.
The second limiting principle is that the duty of confidence applies neither to useless information, nor to trivia. There is no need for me to develop this point.
The third limiting principle is of far greater importance. It is that, although the basis of the law’s protection of confidence is that there is a public interest that confidences should be preserved and protected by the law, nevertheless that public interest may be outweighed by some other countervailing public interest which favours disclosure. This limitation may apply, as the learned judge pointed out, to all types of confidential information. It is this limiting principle which may require a court to carry out a balancing operation, weighing the public interest in maintaining confidence against a countervailing public interest favouring disclosure’.

Judges:

Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Hutton, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Griffiths, Lord Jauncey

Citations:

[1990] 1 AC 109, [1988] UKHL 6, [1987] 1 WLR 776, [1988] 3 All ER 545

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

ApprovedO Mustad and Son v Dosen and Another; O Mustad and Son vAllcock HL 1924
(Heard in 1924, but noted only in 1963) Dosen worked for a company T under a contract of employment that included an undertaking to keep confidential information acquired at work. His employer went into liquidation. The benefit of that company’s . .
ApprovedLion Laboratories Ltd v Evans CA 1985
Lion Laboratories manufactured and marketed the Lion Intoximeter which was used by the police for measuring blood alcohol levels of motorists. Two ex-employees approached the Press with four documents taken from Lion. The documents indicated that . .
CitedGlyn v Weston Feature Film Co 1916
Relief for copyright infringement was refused where the nature of the work tended to gross immorality. Younger J said that it was: ‘clear law that copyright cannot exist in a work of a tendency so grossly immoral as this, a work which apart from its . .
CitedBile Bean Manufacturing Co v Davidson SCS 1906
The second division refused relief against copyright infringement to a company which had perpetrated a deliberate fraud on the public by a series of false factual statements about its products. Lord Justice-Clerk Lord Macdonald said: ‘No man is . .
CitedSlingsby v Bradford Patent Truck and Trolley Co 1905
Equitable relief was refused for an infringement of copyright where the work made false statements with intention to deceive the public. . .
See AlsoAttorney General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No.1) HL 13-Aug-1987
A retired secret service officer intended to publish his memoirs through the defendant. The house heard an appeal against a temporary injunction restraining publication.
Held: Lord Bridge delivered his dissenting speech in the case of . .
At First InstanceAttorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd QBD 1988
A Mr Peter Wright had written a book about his service in MI5. The Crown sought to restrain publication of the book by newspapers and also, as against The Sunday Times, an account of profits.
Held: As to this latter Scott J, said: ‘I had . .
Appeal FromAttorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd CA 2-Jan-1988
A former employee of the Secret Service had written a book (‘Spycatcher’). The AG sought several remedies including damages against a newspaper for serialising it. Dillon LJ said: ‘It has seemed to me throughout the hearing of this appeal that there . .

Cited by:

CitedAttorney-General v Greater Manchester Newspapers Ltd QBD 4-Dec-2001
The defendant newspaper had published facts relating to the whereabouts of two youths protected by injunction against the publication of any information likely to lead to their location. The injunction was not ambiguous or unclear. ‘Likely’ did not . .
CitedFrankson and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Johns v Same CA 8-May-2003
The claimants sought damages for injuries alleged to have been received at the hands of prison officers whilst in prison. They now sought disclosure by the police of statements made to the police during the course of their investigation.
Held: . .
CitedKiam v MGN Ltd CA 28-Jan-2002
Where a court regards a jury award in a defamation case as excessive, a ‘proper’ award can be substituted for it is not whatever sum court thinks appropriate, wholly uninfluenced by jury’s view, but the highest award which a jury could reasonably . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Jones and Lloyd HL 4-Mar-1999
21 people protested peacefully on the verge of the A344, next to the perimeter fence at Stonehenge. Some carried banners saying ‘Never Again,’ ‘Stonehenge Campaign 10 years of Criminal Injustice’ and ‘Free Stonehenge.’ The officer in charge . .
CitedReynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others HL 28-Oct-1999
Fair Coment on Political Activities
The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the . .
CitedCampbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1) HL 6-May-2004
The claimant appealed against the denial of her claim that the defendant had infringed her right to respect for her private life. She was a model who had proclaimed publicly that she did not take drugs, but the defendant had published a story . .
CitedTillery Valley Foods v Channel Four Television, Shine Limited ChD 18-May-2004
The claimant sought an injunction to restrain the defendants broadcasting a film, claiming that it contained confidential material. A journalist working undercover sought to reveal what he said were unhealthy practices in the claimant’s meat . .
CitedX, A Woman Formerly Known As Mary Bell v Stephen O’Brien, News Group Newspapers Ltd MGN Ltd QBD 21-May-2003
An injunction effective against the world, was granted to restrain any act to identify the claimant in the media, including the Internet. She had been convicted of murder when a child, and had since had a child herself. An order had been granted . .
CitedA, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, Mahmoud Abu Rideh Jamal Ajouaou v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 11-Aug-2004
The claimants had each been detained without trial for more than two years, being held as suspected terrorists. They were free leave to return to their own countries, but they feared for their lives if returned. They complained that the evidence . .
CitedPaddick v Associated Newspapers Ltd QBD 10-Dec-2003
The defendant sought disclosure of full statements used by the claimant . Extracts only had been supplied, and he said they contained private and confidential material.
Held: The application failed. The claimant had stated that the balance of . .
CitedEPI Environmental Technologies Inc and Another v Symphony Plastic Technologies Plc and Another ChD 21-Dec-2004
The claimant had developed an additive which would assist in making plastic bags bio-degradable. They alleged that, in breach of confidentiality agreements, the defendants had copied the product. The defendants said the confidentiality agreement was . .
CitedHyde Park Residence Ltd v Yelland, News Group Newspapers Ltd, News International Ltd, Murrell CA 10-Feb-2000
The court considered a dispute about ownership and confidence in and copyright of of video tapes taken by Princess Diana before her death.
Held: The courts have an inherent discretion to refuse to enforce of copyright. When assessing whether . .
CitedDouglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others (No 3) CA 18-May-2005
The principal claimants sold the rights to take photographs of their wedding to a co-claimant magazine (OK). Persons acting on behalf of the defendants took unauthorised photographs which the defendants published. The claimants had retained joint . .
CitedHellewell v Chief Constable of Derbyshire QBD 13-Jan-1995
The police were asked by shopkeepers concerned about shoplifting, for photographs of thieves so that the staff would recognise them. The police provided photographs including one of the claimant taken in custody. The traders were told only to show . .
ApprovedDerbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others HL 18-Feb-1993
Local Council may not Sue in Defamation
Local Authorities must be open to criticism as political and administrative bodies, and so cannot be allowed to sue in defamation. Such a right would operate as ‘a chill factor’ on free speech. Freedom of speech was the underlying value which . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms HL 8-Jul-1999
Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
CitedAxon, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another Admn 23-Jan-2006
A mother sought to challenge guidelines issued by the respondent which would allow doctors to protect the confidentiality of women under 16 who came to them for assistance even though the sexual activities they might engage in would be unlawful.
CitedMcKennitt and others v Ash and Another QBD 21-Dec-2005
The claimant sought to restrain publication by the defendant of a book recounting very personal events in her life. She claimed privacy and a right of confidence. The defendant argued that there was a public interest in the disclosures.
Held: . .
CitedAssociated Newspapers Ltd v Prince of Wales CA 21-Dec-2006
The defendant newspaper appealed summary judgment against it for breach of confidence and copyright infringement having published the claimant’s journals which he said were private.
Held: Upheld, although the judge had given insufficient . .
CitedLord Browne of Madingley v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 3-Apr-2007
The appellant sought to restrict publication by the defendants in the Mail on Sunday of matters which he said were a breach of confidence. He had lied to a court in giving evidence, whilst at the same time being ready to trash the reputation of his . .
CitedMosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 24-Jul-2008
The defendant published a film showing the claimant involved in sex acts with prostitutes. It characterised them as ‘Nazi’ style. He was the son of a fascist leader, and a chairman of an international sporting body. He denied any nazi element, and . .
CitedCallaghan v Independent News and Media Ltd QBNI 7-Jan-2009
callaghan_inmQBNI2009
The claimant was convicted in 1987 of a callous sexual murder. He sought an order preventing the defendant newspaper publishing anything to allow his or his family’s identification and delay his release. The defendant acknowledged the need to avoid . .
CitedMohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 4) Admn 4-Feb-2009
In an earlier judgment, redactions had been made relating to reports by the US government of its treatment of the claimant when held by them at Guantanamo bay. The claimant said he had been tortured and sought the documents to support his defence of . .
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v Guardian News Media Ltd QBD 19-Mar-2009
The bank sought continuation of an injunction preventing publication by the defendant of papers leaked to relating to the claimant’s tax management. The claimant claimed in confidentiality. The papers did not reveal any unlawful activity. The . .
CitedTchenguiz and Others v Imerman CA 29-Jul-2010
Anticipating a refusal by H to disclose assets in ancillary relief proceedings, W’s brothers wrongfully accessed H’s computers to gather information. The court was asked whether the rule in Hildebrand remained correct. W appealed against an order . .
CitedBritish Broadcasting Corporation v Harpercollins Publishers Ltd and Another ChD 4-Oct-2010
The claimant sought an injunction and damages to prevent the defendant publishing a book identifying himself as ‘the Stig’ saying that this broke his undertaking of confidentialty as to his identity, a necessary part of the character in the TV . .
CitedGray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another; Coogan v Same ChD 25-Feb-2011
The claimants said that agents of the defendant had unlawfully accessed their mobile phone systems. The court was now asked whether the agent (M) could rely on the privilege against self incrimination, and otherwise as to the progress of the case. . .
CitedSteen v Her Majesty’s Attorney General; Attorney-General v Punch Ltd and Another CA 23-Mar-2001
The appellant appealed against a finding of contempt of court at common law as regards a report in Punch published when he had been its editor.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The A-G had failed to establish the mens rea of contempt in the . .
CitedCTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another (1) QBD 16-May-2011
A leading footballer had obtained an injunction restraining the defendants from publishing his identity and allegations of sexual misconduct. The claimant said that she had demanded money not to go public.
Held: It had not been suggested that . .
CitedCTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Thomas (2) QBD 23-May-2011
The claimant had obtained a privacy injunction, but the name of the claimant had nevertheless been widey distributed on the Internet. The defendant newspaper now sought to vary the terms. The second defendant did not oppose the injunction. . .
CitedGoodwin v NGN Ltd and VBN QBD 9-Jun-2011
The claimant had obtained an injunction preventing publication of his name and that of his coworker with whom he had had an affair. After widespread publication of his name elsewhere, the defendant had secured the discharge of the order as regards . .
CitedKJO v XIM QBD 7-Jul-2011
The claimant had, some 20 years previously, been convicted and sentenced for forgery of a will. The defendants, relatives, had ever since written to those with whom he had dealings to tell them of the conviction and facts. The claimant, unable to . .
CitedKelly (A Minor) v British Broadcasting Corporation FD 25-Jul-2000
K, aged 16, had left home to join what was said to be a religious sect. His whereabouts were unknown. He had been made a ward of court and the Official Solicitor was appointed to represent his interests. He had sent messages to say that he was well . .
CitedHutcheson v Popdog Ltd and Another CA 19-Dec-2011
The claimant had obtained an injunction to prevent the defendant publishing private materials regarding him. That injunction had been continued by consent but was no challenged by a third party news publisher.
Held: Leave to appeal was . .
CitedTwentieth Century Fox Film Corp and Others v Harris and Others ChD 5-Feb-2013
The court was asked whether a copyright owner has a proprietary claim to money derived from infringement of the copyright.
Held: He did not. No such argument could be shown to have suceeded before. . .
CitedVestergaard Frandsen A/S and Others v Bestnet Europe Ltd and Others SC 22-May-2013
The claimant companies appealed against a reversal of their judgment against a former employee that she had misused their confidential trade secrets after leaving their employment. The companies manufactured and supplied bednets designed to prevent . .
CitedMartin and Others Gabriele v Giambrone P/A Giambrone and Law QBNI 5-Mar-2013
The claimants had made investments through their solicitors, the defendants. The investments failed. The defendants were said to have made a foul and threatening posting on facebook about the claimant after failure in earlier proceedings. The . .
CitedLord Carlile of Berriew QC, and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 12-Nov-2014
The claimant had supported the grant of a visa to a woman in order to speak to members of Parliament who was de facto leader of an Iranian organsation which had in the past supported terrorism and had been proscribed in the UK, but that proscription . .
CitedKennedy v The Charity Commission SC 26-Mar-2014
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the . .
CitedPJS v News Group Newspapers Ltd SC 19-May-2016
The appellants had applied for restrictions on the publication of stories about their extra marital affairs. The Court of Appeal had removed the restrictions on the basis that the story had been widely spread outside the jurisdiction both on the . .
CitedWillers v Joyce and Another (Re: Gubay (Deceased) No 2) SC 20-Jul-2016
The Court was asked whether and in what circumstances a lower court may follow a decision of the Privy Council which has reached a different conclusion from that of the House of Lords (or the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal) on an earlier occasion. . .
CitedBancoult, Regina (on The Application of) (No 3) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs SC 8-Feb-2018
Diplomatic Protection Lost to Public Domain
The claimant challenged the use of a Marine Protected Area Order to exclude the Chagossians from their homelands on their British Indian Overseas Territory. They had sought to have admitted and used in cross examination of witnesses leaked . .
CitedPatel v Mirza SC 20-Jul-2016
The claimant advanced funds to the respondent for him to invest in a bank of which the claimant had insider knowledge. In fact the defendant did not invest the funds, the knowledge was incorrect. The defendant however did not return the sums . .
CitedElgizouli v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Mar-2020
Defendants were to face trial in the US, accused of monstrous crimes. The appellant challenged the release of information to the USA by the respondent to support such prosecutions when the death penalty was a possible outcome of a conviction: ‘The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Human Rights, Information

Leading Case

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.180685

Lin and Another v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis: QBD 25 Aug 2015

The claimants were facing capital charges in Thailand. They sought the release of information held by the defendant to assist in their defence on charges of the murder of two British tourists. In particular a report had been prepared by the MPS about the investigation in Thailand after doubts about the investigation. The MPS aid that releasing the report would undermine international co-operation between police forces.
Held: The issue came down to whther the defendant had a right to refuse access. The defendant had correctly applied section 29, and the application was refused. It appeared that there was in fact nothing in the report (viewed as it was from a distance) which would provide assistance to the defendants, and ‘the objections to disclosure raised by the MPS to defeat the application are valid and, on the facts of the case, suffice to outweigh the claimants’ otherwise strong interest in access.’

Judges:

Green J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 2484 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Data Protection Act 1998 7(9) 29, Directive 95/46/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedElgizouli v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Mar-2020
Defendants were to face trial in the US, accused of monstrous crimes. The appellant challenged the release of information to the USA by the respondent to support such prosecutions when the death penalty was a possible outcome of a conviction: ‘The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Information, Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.551515

Lambeth London Borough Council (Local Government): ICO 10 Apr 2019

The complainant has requested information on any work carried out on the Carnegie at Herne Hill including costs information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough of Lambeth has appropriately applied regulation 12(4)(b) in response. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take the any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
EIR 12(4)(b): Complaint not upheld

Citations:

[2019] UKICO fer0767084

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.638105

Lambeth London Borough Council (Local Government): ICO 20 Sep 2018

The complainant has requested information in relation to the Community Asset Transfer of Carnegie Library. The public authority has relied on the exemption at section 43(2) FOIA to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner has concluded that the public authority was not entitled to rely on the exemption.
FOI 43: Complaint upheld

Citations:

[2018] UKICO fs50719675

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.628421

Lambeth London Borough Council (Local Government): ICO 30 Jan 2018

The complainant has requested information on the budget for the London Borough of Lambeth Council’s scheme to build a new town hall as well as details of housing acquisitions made by the developer. The Council provided some information and explanations to the complainant but he was concerned the Council had not provided the specific budget information asked for as well as any updates to the budget that had been made. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has provided sufficient information to satisfy the request and does not hold any further information within the scope of the request and has therefore complied with its obligations under section 1(1) of the FOIA.
FOI 1: Complaint not upheld

Citations:

[2018] UKICO fs50688844

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.617388

Lambeth London Borough Council (Local Government): ICO 18 Jan 2018

The complainant has requested unredacted financial data sheets for the proposed regeneration of Cressingham Gardens. London Borough of Lambeth Council (‘the Council’) refused the request on the basis of the exception at regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the regulation 12(5)(e) exception is engaged and the public interest favours maintaining the exception and withholding the information. She requires no steps to be taken.
EIR 12(5)(e): Complaint not upheld

Citations:

[2018] UKICO fer0677229

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.617387

The Abbey Christian Brothers Grammar School (Education (School)): ICO 5 Sep 2016

The complainant has requested information concerning the trustees of the pension scheme of the Abbey Christian Brothers Grammar School (the ‘School’). The School responded to the request and has informed the complainant that he has received all the information that it holds. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities the School has provided all the requested information which it holds and has complied with its obligations under section 1(1)(a) and (b) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
FOI 1(1)(a)(b): Not upheld

Citations:

[2016] UKICO FS50626916

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.571053

New ISG Ltd v Vernon and others: ChD 14 Nov 2007

The claimant sought to continue an interim injunction obtained without notice. The claimant sought to restrain former employees misusing information it claimed they had taken with them. The claimants said that having objected to a transfer of their employments they had not become employees of the claimant.
Held: Where an employee did not know the identity of a transferee company until after the transfer, it would go against the employees right to choose an employer to bind him to the contract with the new employer. The defendants had resigned within two days of being notified of the transfer. The court considered the balance of convenience arguments. Neither side would be adequately compensated by damages or an undertaking for them. However there had been delay in commencing the proceedings and that led to the injunctions being discharged.

Judges:

Behrens QC J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2665 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 4(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedKatsikas and others v Konstantinidis and others ECJ 16-Dec-1992
ECJ Article 3(1) of Directive 77/187 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings is to be interpreted as not . .
CitedSecretary of State for Trade and Industry v Cook and others EAT 13-Dec-1996
Employees who are otherwise qualified employees will transfer with their undertaking even though they are unaware of the identity of their new employer. Morison J considered the situation where there was a transfer of the undertaking, but the . .
CitedHumphreys v Oxford University CA 18-Jan-2000
In a transfer of undertakings, where the employee could show that the transfer of his employment to a new employer would lead to a real detriment, the transfer operated to entitle the employee to terminate his contract vis a vis the first employer . .
CitedArbuthnot Fund Managers Ltd v Rawlings CA 13-Mar-2003
Post-termination restraints in a service agreement. . .
CitedHay v George Hanson 1996
Lord Johnston said: ‘We would pause to reflect that if the withholding of consent is, as we think it is, the proper consideration, it should not be difficult in most cases to distinguish between such withholding of consent and mere expressions of . .
CitedTownsend v Jarman 1900
A partner gave a covenant not to carry on the business of a corn, seed or manure merchant or nurseryman within a distance of 40 miles from Chard. The partners sold the business to a company, of which they remained directors. It was wound up, and the . .
CitedAmerican Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd HL 5-Feb-1975
Interim Injunctions in Patents Cases
The plaintiffs brought proceedings for infringement of their patent. The proceedings were defended. The plaintiffs obtained an interim injunction to prevent the defendants infringing their patent, but they now appealed its discharge by the Court of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Information, Employment

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.261463

Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers plc: CA 14 Oct 2002

The newspaper appealed against a finding that it had infringed the claimant’s privacy by publishing a photograph of her leaving a drug addiction clinic.
Held: The claimant had courted publicity, and denied an involvement in drugs. The defence of qualified privilege in defamation is not to be equated with the rules in privacy cases. The photograph was an essential part of demonstrating the deceit of the claimant. Given the story, the addition of the photograph was not particularly significant. If the publication was in the public interest, the journalist had to have some latitude. The balance between the Convention created rights of privacy and the freedom of the press is still being developed. The 1998 Act exemption was given to the data, once established, and therefore applied at all stages of its use. ‘In interpreting the Act it is appropriate to look to the Directive for assistance. The Act should, if possible, be interpreted in a manner that is consistent with the Directive. Furthermore, because the Act has, in large measure, adopted the wording of the Directive, it is not appropriate to look for the precision in the use of language that is usually to be expected from the parliamentary draftsman. A purposive approach to making sense of the provisions is called for.’ and ‘The development of the law of confidentiality since the Human Rights Act 1998 came into force has seen information described as ‘confidential’ not where it has been confided by one person to another, but where it relates to an aspect of an individual’s private life which he does not choose to make public. We consider that the unjustifiable publication of such information would better be described as breach of privacy rather than breach of confidence.’

Judges:

Phillips of Worth Matravers MR, Chadwick LJ, Keene Lj

Citations:

Times 16-Oct-2002, Gazette 31-Oct-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1373, [2003] 2 WLR 80, [2003] QB 633, [2003] 1 All ER 224, [2003] EMLR 39

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Data Protection Act 1998 32, European Convention on Human Rights, Directive 95/46/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedA v B plc and Another (Flitcroft v MGN Ltd) CA 11-Mar-2002
A newspaper company appealed against an order preventing it naming a footballer who, they claimed, had been unfaithful to his wife.
Held: There remains a distinction between the right of privacy which attaches to sexual activities within and . .
Appeal fromCampbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 27-Mar-2002
The applicant sought damages for the defendant having infringed her privacy in several ways, including under the 1998 Act. The defendant argued that she had invited publicity and had misled the public as to her drug problem. A photograch had been . .

Cited by:

CitedRe S (A Child) CA 10-Jul-2003
The mother of the child on behalf of whom the application was made, was to face trial for murder. The child was in care and an order was sought to restrain publiction of material which might reveal his identity, including matters arising during the . .
CitedLord, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 1-Sep-2003
The claimant was a category A prisoner serving a sentence of life imprisonment for murder. He sought the reasons for his categorisation as a Class A prisoner. Unhappy at the disclosure made, he sought information under the 1998 Act. It was argued . .
CitedWainwright and another v Home Office HL 16-Oct-2003
The claimant and her son sought to visit her other son in Leeds Prison. He was suspected of involvement in drugs, and therefore she was subjected to strip searches. There was no statutory support for the search. The son’s penis had been touched . .
CitedDurant v Financial Services Authority CA 8-Dec-2003
The appellant had been unsuccessful in litigation against his former bank. The Financial Services Authority had subsequently investigated his complaint against the bank. Using section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998, he requested disclosure of his . .
Appeal fromCampbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1) HL 6-May-2004
The claimant appealed against the denial of her claim that the defendant had infringed her right to respect for her private life. She was a model who had proclaimed publicly that she did not take drugs, but the defendant had published a story . .
CitedX, A Woman Formerly Known As Mary Bell v Stephen O’Brien, News Group Newspapers Ltd MGN Ltd QBD 21-May-2003
An injunction effective against the world, was granted to restrain any act to identify the claimant in the media, including the Internet. She had been convicted of murder when a child, and had since had a child herself. An order had been granted . .
CitedPaddick v Associated Newspapers Ltd QBD 10-Dec-2003
The defendant sought disclosure of full statements used by the claimant . Extracts only had been supplied, and he said they contained private and confidential material.
Held: The application failed. The claimant had stated that the balance of . .
See AlsoCampbell v MGN Ltd (No 2) HL 20-Oct-2005
The appellant sought to challenge the level of costs sought by the claimant after she had succeeded in her appeal to the House. Though a relatively small sum had been awarded, the costs and success fee were very substantial. The newspaper claimed . .
At Court of AppealMGN Limited v United Kingdom ECHR 24-Oct-2008
The Mirror had published a picture of Naomi Campbell leaving a rehabilitation clinic. They appealed a decision in which having been found to have infringed her privacy by a covertly taken photograph, they had then been ordered to pay very . .
At Court of AppealMGN Limited v United Kingdom ECHR 18-Jan-2011
The applicant publisher said that the finding against it of breach of confidence and the system of success fees infringed it Article 10 rights to freedom of speech. It had published an article about a model’s attendance at Narcotics anonymous . .
CitedDawson-Damer and Others v Taylor Wessing Llp and Others ChD 6-Aug-2015
The clamants sought orders under the 1998 Act for disclosure of documents about them by the defendant solicitors and others. The defendants said that the request would require the consideration of a very large number of documents, considering in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Information, Media, Human Rights

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.177442

Ofcom (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2007

ICO The complainant contacted the Commissioner following the failure of Ofcom to provide any of the information requested. Following the intervention of the Commissioner, Ofcom provided some of the information requested and refused the rest under section 12. The Commissioner finds that section 12 has been applied correctly but that Ofcom failed to comply with sections 1 and 17 in its initial response. These breaches have since been remedied and no further action is required
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 12 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 16 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 17 – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2007] UKICO FS50112855

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.532892

Chorley Borough Council (Decision Notice): ICO 5 Jul 2005

ICO The complainant requested information relating to the incidence of road traffic accidents. The Council failed to respond to the complainant’s request for information within the statutory time period but subsequently provided the information. Therefore, the Decision Notice identified the breach but no further steps were required.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2005] UKICO FS50074330

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.533229

Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Decision Notice): ICO 15 Nov 2012

ICO The complainant requested information from the Children and Family Court Advisory Support Service (CAFCASS) about the work it carries out with children. CAFCASS provided some information but said that it would exceed the cost limit to comply with one part of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that CAFCASS was entitled to refuse to provide the requested information under section 12. He requires no steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 12 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50459762

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529986

National Policing Improvement Agency (Decision Notice): ICO 2 May 2012

ICO The complainant requested information relating to a National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) project called ‘Project Lantern’. NPIA refused the request citing section 12(1) of FOIA, but also redacted and disclosed some information outside of FOIA. The Information Commissioner’s decision is that NPIA incorrectly relied on section 12(1) and failed to issue a refusal notice in accordance with section 17(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the requested information or issue a valid refusal notice citing a valid exemption.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 12 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 16 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 17 – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50421702

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529512

Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (Decision Notice): ICO 19 Oct 2011

ICO The complainant requested information concerning the network rationalisation of the DVLA, following the publication of a leaked document setting out the options for the network rationalisation. The public authority withheld the requested information by virtue of section 35(1)(a) of the Act. The Commissioner considered the withheld information and the DVLA’s application of section 35(1)(a) and concluded in this case that the exemption was engaged and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosure of the information. The Commissioner has also found that the DVLA breached section 10(1) through its handling of the request. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 35 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2011] UKICO FS50378823

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.530958

Civil Aviation Authority (Decision Notice): ICO 14 Feb 2006

The complainant requested access to the registration details of five aircraft impounded on the night of 21 December 1988, the names of the airlines involved, the reason for the grounding of these aircrafts and the authority that implemented the action. The CAA informed the complainant that they did not hold this information but the complainant maintained that it did exist. Having investigated this matter the ICO is satisfied that the CAA does not hold the information requested. The Information Tribunal has ruled on this decision and has dismissed this appeal.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2006] UKICO FS50096401

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.533351

Christchurch and East Dorset Councils (Decision Notice): ICO 15 Nov 2012

ICO The complainant has requested a copy of a letter received by the council’s mayor from her chaplain in connection with a planning application in which the chaplain was an interested party. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council acted correctly in disclosing that part of the letter which related to the planning matter and in relying on the section 41 exemption to continue to withhold the remainder of the letter. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 41 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50449294

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529987

Department for Culture Media and Sport (Decision Notice): ICO 4 Jan 2012

ICO The complainant requested information in connection with the decision by the Secretary of State not to list Slough Town Hall as a building of special architectural or historic interest in accordance with the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. The Commissioner’s decision is that: the exception at regulation 12(4)(e) was engaged in respect of the disputed information. However, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exception did not outweigh the public interest in disclosure in respect of most of the disputed information. The public authority correctly withheld the names and contact details of junior officials and members of the public on the basis of the exception at regulation 13. The public authority breached regulation 11 for failing to conduct an internal review. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose all of the information he has found was not exempt.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 11 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 12.4.e – Complaint Partly Upheld, EIR 13 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FER0409841

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529052

Lambeth London Borough Council (Decision Notice): ICO 12 May 2010

ICO The complainant made a request to the London Borough of Lambeth Council for the trial bundle and case file with regards to legal proceedings concerning a residential property within the borough. The Commissioner finds that the request should have been considered under the Environmental Information Regulations (EIR). The Commissioner has investigated the complaint and finds that regulation 12(5)(b) was engaged (apart from three documents) and the public interest in maintaining the exception outweighed the public interest in disclosure. The Commissioner requires the Council to disclose three documents.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 5 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 5 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 12.5.b – Complaint Partly Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2010] UKICO FS50228244

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.531451

Northumbria Police (Decision Notice): ICO 2 May 2012

ICO The complainant has requested information about confidentiality clauses, agreements and policies that the public authority’s staff need to comply with as well as information about disciplinary action against its staff. The public authority initially found the request to be ‘vexatious’ but subsequently provided some information and also relied on the exemptions at sections 40(2) and 41(1). The complainant has not complained about the application of these exemptions so they have not been considered. The Information Commissioner has found no breaches and does not require any steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50435645

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529515

NHS Blackpool (Decision Notice): ICO 21 May 2012

ICO The complainant made a series of multipart requests to NHS Blackpool (the trust) in respect of different GP services paid for by the trust. The trust provided some information in its initial response and decided to disclose further information during the course of the Commissioner’s investigation. The trust relied on section 43(2) to withhold the remaining information. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 43(2) was not engaged in respect of some of the withheld information, that a small amount of the requested information is not held, and that the remainder of the information was correctly withheld under section 43(2). The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the withheld information in respect of which section 43(2) is not engaged (points 3 (f), and 5 (c) and (f)).
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 43 – Complaint Partly Upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50415788

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529513

Cabinet Office (Decision Notice) (2): ICO 26 Nov 2012

ICO The complainant requested information relating to the Papal visit in 2010. The Cabinet Office provided some information but withheld the remainder on the basis that it was exempt from disclosure by virtue of section 27 (international relations) and section 35 (formulation of government policy). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office correctly applied sections 27 and 35 to the withheld information. He requires no steps to be taken. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 27 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 35 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50443532

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529979

Cambridgeshire County Council (Decision Notice): ICO 27 Nov 2012

ICO The complainant has requested copies of records relating to a dispute between Cambridgeshire County Council . . and an external contractor about the completion of the Guided Busway Scheme; a scheme engineered by the Council with the aim of improving public transport services. The Council informed the complainant that part of the requested information was obtainable from the Technology and Construction Court. For the remainder, the Council advised that the information was subject to the exceptions provided by regulations 12(5)(b) (course of justice), 12(5)(d) (confidentiality of proceedings) and 12(5)(f) (voluntary supply) of the EIR. The Commissioner has found that regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR is engaged and that in all the circumstances of the case the public interest favours the withholding of the information. He does not therefore require any steps to be taken as a result of this notice. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 12.5.b – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50431297

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529984

Ashcombe Primary School (Decision Notice): ICO 5 Oct 2005

ICO The complainant requested copies of all correspondence regarding the felling of trees at the School. The School did not confirm or deny whether the information specified in the request was held within the 20 working day time limit. The Decision Notice identified the breach but did not require any steps to be taken as a response was subsequently provided.
FOI 10: Upheld

Citations:

[2005] UKICO FS50074993

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.533262

Safe and Secure Insurances Services Limited (Undertakings): ICO 25 Apr 2012

ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by Safe and Secure Insurances Services Limited. This follows the purchase of a hard drive from the Internet which contained personal data relating to the company’s clients.

Citations:

[2012] UKICO 2012-35

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529430

Eastleigh Borough Council (Decision Notice): ICO 14 Mar 2013

ICO The complainant requested information in relation to the proposed site for a particular development referred to in the Eastleigh Borough Council’s draft local development plan. The Council stated that the information requested was exempt under regulation 12(4)(e). At the time of its internal review, the Council also sought to rely in regulation 12(4)(d) in relation to the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: regulation 12(4)(d) is engaged for some information but the public interest favours disclosure, and regulation 12(4)(e) is engaged for all of the withheld information, but the public interest in disclosure of the information outweighs the public interest in maintaining the exception. For information which engages both exceptions the public interest in disclosure outweighs the aggregated public interest in maintaining both regulation 12(4)(d) and regulation 12(4)(e). The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the information withheld under regulations 12(4)(d) and 12(4)(e). This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 12.4.d – Complaint Upheld, EIR 12.4.e – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2013] UKICO FER0456669

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.528077

Aneurin Bevan Health Board (Monetary Penalty Notice): ICO 30 Apr 2012

ICO A monetary penalty of andpound;70,000 has been issued to the Aneurin Bevan Health Board following an incident where a sensitive report – containing explicit details relating to a patient’s health – was sent to the wrong person.

Citations:

[2012] UKICO 2012-19

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529370

Portsmouth City Council (Decision Notice): ICO 2 Apr 2012

ICO The complainant has requested details of the sale of council properties by Portsmouth City Council Asset Management Service, outside the right to buy process, to either council staff or elected members for the years 2003 and 2004. The Commissioner’s decision is that Portsmouth City Council correctly relied on section 12 of the Act not to comply with the complainant’s request for information.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 12 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50420415

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529426

Blythe Bridge High School (Decision Notice): ICO 10 Oct 2005

IC The complainant requested copies of all correspondence and other documentation held by the school relating to himself and his daughter, a pupil at the school. The school provided the information but failed to do so within 20 working days. The Decision Notice did not therefore identify any steps to be taken.
FOI 10: Upheld

Citations:

[2005] UKICO FS50068232

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.533263

Cabinet Office (Decision Notice) FS50447726: ICO 27 Nov 2012

ICO The complainant requested information relating to proposals for changes to the fees and charging elements of the Freedom of Information Act. The Cabinet Office refused the request, citing the formulation of government policy exemption, section 35(1)(a). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office correctly applied section 35 to the withheld information. He requires no steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 35 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50447726

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529981

Sheffield City Council (Decision Notice): ICO 3 Apr 2012

ICO On 26 November 2011 the complainant requested the names of two leaseholder members of an advisory group and a record of their attendance at advisory group meetings. Although the council subsequently disclosed the information to the complainant it did so outside of the 20 working day period required by the Act. The Commissioner’s decision is therefore that Sheffield City Council breached section 10(1) of the Act. However the Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50431394

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529431

Civil Service Commission (Decision Notice) FS50449989: ICO 7 Nov 2012

ICO The complainant has requested information from the Civil Service Commissioner (CSC) which shows that Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) was authorised to use public funds to charge and convict a former employee with having extreme political views. The Information Commissioner’s (the Commissioner) decision is that CSC does not hold any recorded information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50449989

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529988

Monmouthshire County Council (Decision Notice): ICO 28 May 2012

ICO The complainant has requested whether there was any CCTV footage of an incident involving one of the Council’s buses which occurred on 16 November 2010. Following the Commissioner’s procedural decision notice (reference number FS50402885) instructing the Council to comply with section 1(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (‘the Act’) by either confirming whether the requested information was held or issuing a valid refusal notice under section 17 of the Act, the Council contacted the complainant to confirm that the information was not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that Monmouthshire County Council has now complied with its obligations under section 1(1) of the Act. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2012/0123 struck out.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50435215

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Freedom of Information Act 2000 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.529511