Tag: Information

Walsh (as executrix of the estate of David G Walsh) and Others v Deloitte and Touche Inc , Trustee of the estate of Bre-X Minerals Limited , a bankrupt: PC 17 Dec 2001

References: No 37 of 2000, [2001] UKPC 58
Links: PC, PC, PC, Bailii
Coram: Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Hoffmann Lord Rodger of Earlsferry Sir Martin Nourse Sir Kenneth Keith
Ratio:(Bahamas) Shares were sold in a mining company whose prices had been buoyed by rumour, but where disclosure of difficulties had not been made, and eventually it became clear that samples had bee fraudulently salted. The company became insolvent, and the respondents appointed. They obtained a continuing Mareva injunction against the appellant as executor of her husband’s estate in the Bahamas.
Held: An officer of a company owes a fiduciary duty to the company not to use his knowledge of its affairs by making a profit from dealing in what he knows to be a false market in its shares. Interlocutory jurisdiction is ordinarily ancillary to substantive jurisdiction. There was evidence that the appellants had tried move assets beyond the jurisdiction. The judge’s discretion had been exercised properly. An appeal on the ground of delay had not been pleaded.
This case cites:

  • Cited – Reading -v- Attorney General HL ([1951] AC 507, [1951] 1 All ER 617, [1951] 1 TLR 480, 95 Sol Jo 155, Bailii, [1951] UKHL 1)
    The applicant had been a sergeant in the army. He had misused army property and his uniform to assist in smuggling operations. After serving his sentence he now sought repayment of the money he had earned.
    Held: His claim failed. The money had . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 10-Jul-16
Ref: 167223

Home Office (Central Government ): ICO 8 Apr 2015

References: [2015] UKICO FS50533359
Links: Bailii
ICO The complainant requested for each of the Immigration Removal Centres (IRCs) for which the Home Office (HO) is responsible, its performance against the published Operating Standards for IRCs and the number of performance points deducted in terms of the performance regime set by the contracts or service level agreements (SLAs), and any associated financial deductions applied to the service providers. The Commissioner did not uphold HO’s application of the section 43(2) and section 41(1) FOIA exemptions to the performance information held and also to the performance points information held except that which would make public parts of the business models used by HO and its contractors. He did however uphold HO’s application of the section 43 FOIA exemption to information the disclosure of which would reveal parts of the business models used by HO and its contractors. He also decided that the balance of the public interest favoured maintaining the exemption for this information. The Commissioner also decided that a small amount of information should be redacted from the information to be disclosed where not doing so would disclose personal information proper to be withheld under the section 40(2) FOIA exemption. For the avoidance of doubt the Commissioner set out his decision in detail in a confidential schedule which has been provided to HO only. HO provided the Commissioner, for the purposes of his investigation, with the requested information for three IRCs – those at Colnbrook, Brook House and Yarl’s Wood – for him to consider as a ‘test case’ which he has done. He now requires HO to apply disclosure principles set out in this Decision Notice to the corresponding information held by HO for its other IRCs, whether publicly or privately operated. The Commissioner requires HO to disclose to the complainant the performance information and the performance points information specified in the confidential schedule to this decision. Also, to apply the same principles to the corresponding information held about other IRCs but which HO did not provide to the Commissioner for his consideration.
FOI 41: Upheld FOI 43: Partly upheld
Last Update: 17-Jan-16 Ref: 555313

Manchester City Council (Decision Notice): ICO 23 Apr 2013

References: [2013] UKICO FS50469749
Links: Bailii
ICO The complainant has requested correspondence relating to his complaint against an employee of a healthcare provider contracted by Manchester City Council (‘the council’). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has correctly applied the exemption for personal data at section 40(2) of the FOIA and is therefore entitled to withhold the information. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld
Last Update: 04-Nov-15 Ref: 528209

Elliott v Lloyds TSB Bank; 24 Apr 2012

References: Unreported 24 April 2012
Coram: Behrens HHJ
Leeds County Court – The court considered the extent of the obligation imposed by s 8(2) of the 1998 Act.
Held: The data controller is only required under the section to supply the individual with such personal data as is found after a reasonable and proportionate search.
Statutes: Data Protection Act 1998 8(2)
This case cites:

  • Cited – Ezsias -v- The Welsh Ministers QBD (Bailii, [2007] EWHC B15 (QB), [2007] All ER (D) 65)
    The Claimant claimedunder Section 7(9) of the 1998 Act for failures to disclose data to him following several requests. He sought (i) a declaration that the National Assembly had failed to comply with their obligations under the 1998 Act, (ii) . .

This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Dawson-Damer and Others -v- Taylor Wessing Llp and Others ChD (Bailii, [2015] EWHC 2366 (Ch))
    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 . .

Durham Constabulary (Decision Notice): ICO 31 May 2012

References: [2012] UKICO FS50426106
Links: Bailii
ICO The complainant has requested information about any forensic service provider used by the public authority and details of the service provided. The public authority confirmed who the provider was but stated that it did not hold any further information. The complainant asked it to contact the provider and ascertain this information; the public authority advised that it was not required to do so under the FOIA. The Information Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority acted correctly. He does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld

Regina v Hampshire County Council ex parte K and Another; 1 Nov 1989

References: [1990] 1 FLR 330
Coram: Watkins LJ and Waite J
Application was made for the disclosure of a local authorities social worker records, during the course of care proceedings after allegations of secual abuse had been made against the parents.
Held: The court must look to the interests of the child: ‘as part and parcel of its general welfare, not only in having its own voice sympathetically heard and its own needs sensitively considered but also in ensuring that its parents are given every proper opportunity of having the evidence fairly tested and preparing themselves in advance to meet the grave charges against them.’ and ‘Local authorities therefore have a high duty in law, not only on grounds of general fairness but also in the direct interest of a child whose welfare they serve, to be open in the disclosure of all relevant material affecting that child in their possession or power (excluding documents protected on established grounds of public immunity) which may be of assistance to the natural parent or parents in rebutting charges against one or both of them of in any way ill-treating the child.’
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Durham County Council -v- Dunn CA (Bailii, [2012] EWCA Civ 1654)
    The claimant wished to begin a claim alleging historic sexual abuse while he had been at an institution run by the defendants. The claimant sought pre-trial disclosure of various documents and the court now considered the principle applicable, and . .

X (Adopted Child: Access To Court File); FC 9 Sep 2014

References: [2014] EWFC 33
Links: Bailii, Jud
Coram: Sir James Munby P FD
The applicant’s father had been adopted. Both he and the adopting parents had since died. The applicant now sought disclosure of the records to reveal her the court record of her father’s adoption order.
Held: The order should be made.
Statutes: Adoption and Children Act 2002 79(4)
This case cites:

  • Cited – Re H (Adoption: Disclosure of Information ) ([1995] 1 FLR 236)
    An application was made by the sister of an adopted child for disclosure of the records held in order to allow her to make contact and to warn her of the fact that she might have an inherited genetic disease.
    Held: The jurisdiction to grant . .
  • Cited – D -v- Registrar General ([1997] 2 FLR 240)
    The court considered the procedure to be followed in applications for disclosure to other family members of information held by the Registrar to allow them to contact the adopted child. . .
  • Cited – FL -v- Registrar General FD (Bailii, [2010] EWHC 3520 (Fam), [2011] 2 FCR 229, [2011] Fam Law 453, [2011] 2 FLR 630)
    The claimant sought disclosure of information held by the respondent as to the identities of her pre-adoptive natural parents. . .