“Whether a freedom of information (FOI) request is ‘vexatious’ or not will depend on the burden of meeting the request; the motive of requesters; the value or serious purpose of requests, and any harassment or distress caused, an Information Rights Tribunal has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 13th February 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“Public authorities often have cause to consider whether to treat requests for information as vexatious (section 14 of FOIA) or manifestly unreasonable (regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR). Precise definitions of those terms are difficult to pin down. They are not supplied by legislation. There is no binding authority from appellate courts or tribunals on their meaning in the information rights context. The Information Commissioner’s guidance is long-standing, but First-Tier Tribunals vary in the extent to which they use that guidance.”
Panopticon, 7th February 2013
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
“A person’s name constitutes his or her personal data – so has held the Upper Tribunal recently in Information Commissioner v Financial Services Authority & Edem [2012] UKUT 464 (AAC).”
Panopticon, 7th February 2013
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
“In Davis v ICO and Health and Social Care Information Centre (case no. EA/2012/0175, judgment 24 January 2013) the First-Tier Tribunal applied the absolute exemption under section 21 of FOIA 2000 for information which is reasonably accessible to an applicant other than under section 1. The requested information consisted of health statistics which the public authority was willing to provide to the appellant under its publication scheme for a charge of £1,550. The appellant argued that the charge meant the information could not be considered to be reasonably accessible to a person of ordinary means.”
Panopticon, 31st January 2013
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
“The government is considering how to curb repetitive and overly expensive Freedom of Information requests, a justice minister has said.”
BBC News, 24th January 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Murderers, rapists and kidnappers have received compensation totalling hundreds of thousands of pounds from the Government after complaining that delays in their parole hearings breached their human rights.”
The Independent, 20th January 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“Official legal advice about when Royal consent is required for legislation to proceed has been published after a long-running battle by the Cabinet Office to keep it under wraps.”
The Independent, 15th January 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
Related link: Queen’s or Prince’s Consent (PDF)
“The First-Tier Tribunal’s decision of 13 December 2012 in Montague v (1) Information Commissioner (2) Liverpool John Moores University EA/2012/0109 will be of interest to academic institutions, and any other public bodies whose employees have research interests not necessarily connected with their job. Anya Proops of 11KBW appeared for the University.”
Panopticon, 13th December 2012
“Panopticon has reported recently on the ICO’s new Code of Practice on Anonymisation: see Rachel Kamm’s post here. That Code offers guidance for ensuring data protection-compliant disclosure in difficult cases such as those involving apparently anonymous statistics, and situations where someone with inside knowledge (or a ‘motivated intruder’) could identify someone referred to anonymously in a disclosed document. The Upper Tribunal in Information Commissioner v Magherafelt District Council [2012] UKUT 263 AAC grappled with those issues earlier this year in the context of disclosing a summarised schedule of disciplinary action.”
Panopticon, 13th December 2012
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
“Public authorities required to disclose ‘datasets’ in order to comply with a freedom of information (FOI) request should have to make sure the information is ‘machine readable’ and accompanied by explanatory material, the Government has proposed.”
OUT-LAW.com, 3rd December 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“Public sector bodies cannot guarantee the confidentiality of bid information in the aftermath of an Information Rights Tribunal ruling, an expert has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 27th November 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“This paper focuses on developments in the case law concerning freedom of information over roughly the last 12 months. The number of cases concerning freedom of information being decided has continued to grow at an exponential rate (in part due to successful efforts by the Information Commissioner (‘the IC’) to get on top of the case backlog faced by his office). The Information Rights Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’) website contains the outcomes of over 220 appeals since the beginning of 2012 alone – and the vast majority of these are substantive decisions. There have also been seven Upper Tribunal (‘UT’) decisions, and one decision each from the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.”
Full story (PDF)
11 KBW, 20th November 2012
Source: www.11kbw.com
“Financial services, mobile telecoms and energy companies will be compelled by law to provide consumers with data they hold about their transactions or consumption in an ‘electronic, machine readable’ format, upon request, if they do not do so voluntarily, the Government has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 20th November 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“In the final part of our round-up of recent decisions of the First-Tier Tribunal, Panopticon looks at the qualified exemptions, the public interest and a few other loose ends.”
Panopticon, 13th November 2012
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
“I posted a few days ago about some recent decisions of the First-Tier Tribunal on requests under FOIA and the EIR for personal data. There have been a number of decisions on this issue of late. The following are of note, as they illustrate the types of issues very frequently encountered by public authorities. They also illustrate the nuanced and forensic approach taken by some Tribunals. There may not be a presumption in favour of disclosing personal data, but public authorities should beware assuming that Tribunals will be equally cautious about disclosing all types of personal data.”
Panopticon, 13th November 2012
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
“The ‘personal data’ provisions under s. 40(2) FOIA and regulation 13 EIR can often be very difficult to apply, particularly in light of the Durant ‘notions of assistance’, namely biographical significance and focus. It is correspondingly difficult to predict how such arguments will fare before the Tribunal. Two recent cases offer good illustrations. Both saw the Tribunal order disclosure of property-related personal data which was deemed to be of ‘low inherent sensitivity.’ ”
Panopticon, 8th November 2012
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
“In recent months, the major information law issues have involved the government’s vetoing disclosure of the Prince Charles ‘black spider’ letters, its response to the draft new EU Data Protection Regulation, a number of Article 8 decisions concerning police and criminal records and changes to RIPA. On this last point, note that as of last Thursday, local authorities require a magistrate’s approval for authorising directed surveillance.”
Panopticon, 4th November 2012
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
“The question of whether the convention on collective cabinet responsibility operates, in effect, as a trump card in the FOIA context has been considered in a number of tribunal cases (see further for example the Lamb case concerning a request for disclosure of the Iraq war cabinet minutes and the Cabinet Office case concerning cabinet discussions over the Westland takeover (‘the Westland case’)). Last week, in Cabinet Office v IC, the First-Tier Tribunal handed down a decision in which it reconfirmed the principle that the convention, whilst undoubtedly an important consideration in the FOIA context, does not create any absolute bar against disclosure.”
Panopticon, 23rd October 2012
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
“Litigation relating to information rights can sometimes seem very dry and obscure, entailing lengthy analysis of the merits of public authorities disclosing or withholding information which is highly specialised or obtuse, and of little real interest to the general population. But this case – the case of the ‘Black Spider Letters’ – really is a fascinating one, involving an examination not just of the legislative provisions relating to the disclosure of information, but also a consideration of the existence and extent of constitutional conventions pertaining to the role of the monarchy in government. At the same time, it has the potential to generate such controversy as to make for perfect tabloid fodder. It has been the subject of international news coverage. And it’s not over yet.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 23rd October
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024