Ashu Mathias Ashu v The Information Commissioner

Ashu Mathias Ashu v The Information Commissioner

The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to grant the outcome sought because the Information Commissioner has already provided an outcome to the complaint, and section 166 DPA 2018 is limited to procedural issues, not substantive review. There are no further appropriate procedural steps for the Commissioner to take.

Parties
Applicant: Ashu Mathias Ashu; Respondent: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 166(2) Data Protection Act 2018 / Strike Out Decision
Outcome
Application struck out for lack of jurisdiction and no reasonable prospect of success.
Legal Topics
Subject Access Request, Procedural Jurisdiction, Section 166 DPA 2018, UK GDPR
Data Protection Administrative Law Subject Access Request Procedural Jurisdiction Section 166 DPA 2018 UK GDPR

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashu Mathias Ashu

Applicant

The Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Section 166(2) Data Protection Act 2018 / Strike Out Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to grant the outcome sought under section 166(2) DPA 2018
  2. 2 Whether the Information Commissioner failed to take appropriate procedural steps in handling the complaint

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to grant the outcome sought because the Information Commissioner has already provided an outcome to the complaint, and section 166 DPA 2018 is limited to procedural issues, not substantive review. There are no further appropriate procedural steps for the Commissioner to take.

Court Disposition

Application struck out for lack of jurisdiction and no reasonable prospect of success.

Orders

  • The proceedings are struck out under Rule 8(2)(a) and Rule 8(3)(a).