Albert Tarcy v The Information Commissioner & Anor

Albert Tarcy v The Information Commissioner & Anor

The Tribunal found that section 31(3) FOIA was engaged for part one of the request and section 31(1) for parts 3 to 5. Disclosure or confirmation/denial of the existence of the requested information would be likely to prejudice the prevention or detection of crime. The public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. The Decision Notice reveals no error of law or discretion.

Parties
Appellant: Albert Tarcy; First Respondent: The Information Commissioner; Second Respondent: Transport for London
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Freedom of Information Act 2000 / Final Judgment After Oral Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Law Enforcement Exemptions, Public Interest Test
Information Rights Administrative Law Freedom of Information Law Enforcement Exemptions Public Interest Test

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Albert Tarcy

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

First Respondent

Transport for London

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Freedom of Information Act 2000 / Final Judgment After Oral Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Transport for London was entitled to neither confirm nor deny holding a costs recovery policy under section 31(3) FOIA
  2. 2 Whether exemptions under section 31(1) FOIA were correctly applied to withhold information on costs recovery from graffiti offenders
  3. 3 Whether the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosure

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that section 31(3) FOIA was engaged for part one of the request and section 31(1) for parts 3 to 5. Disclosure or confirmation/denial of the existence of the requested information would be likely to prejudice the prevention or detection of crime. The public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. The Decision Notice reveals no error of law or discretion.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed