Andrew Tyerman v Information Commissioner & Anor

Regulation 12(5)(b) EIR was not engaged because similar or identical information to that requested was already in the public domain through real-time reporting systems such as WaterFit Live and BeachLive, and the respondents failed to demonstrate how disclosure would adversely affect the course of justice in these circumstances.

Parties: Appellant: Andrew Tyerman; Respondent: Information Commissioner; Respondent: South West Water
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 13 November 2024
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome: Appeal allowed
Legal Topics: Environmental Information Regulations, Disclosure of Environmental Information, Public Interest Test, Course of Justice Exception

Administrative Law Environmental Law Information Rights Environmental Information Regulations Disclosure of Environmental Information Public Interest Test Course of Justice Exception

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Andrew Tyerman

Appellant

Information Commissioner

Respondent

South West Water

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether South West Water was entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(b) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 to withhold information requested by the appellant.
2 Whether disclosure of the requested information would adversely affect the course of justice under regulation 12(5)(b) EIR.

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

South West Water to disclose the requested information to the appellant within 35 days from the date of the decision.