Andrew White v The Information Commissioner

Andrew White v The Information Commissioner

The Tribunal found that the Information Commissioner had provided an outcome to the complaint, taken all appropriate procedural steps required by section 165 and 166 DPA 2018, and that no procedural omission occurred. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to direct further investigation or enforcement, and cannot address the substantive merits of the complaint.

Parties
Applicant: Andrew White; Respondent: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Subject Access Request, Procedural Duties of Regulator, Section 166 DPA 2018, Accessibility for Disabled Complainants
Data Protection Administrative Law Subject Access Request Procedural Duties of Regulator Section 166 DPA 2018 Accessibility for Disabled Complainants

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew White

Applicant

The Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Information Commissioner omitted procedural steps required by section 166(1) DPA 2018
  2. 2 Whether the Commissioner failed to provide an outcome to the complaint
  3. 3 Whether the Commissioner failed to address accessibility issues for a severely sight-impaired complainant

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the Information Commissioner had provided an outcome to the complaint, taken all appropriate procedural steps required by section 165 and 166 DPA 2018, and that no procedural omission occurred. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to direct further investigation or enforcement, and cannot address the substantive merits of the complaint.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed