Caroline Shah v The Information Commissioner

Caroline Shah v The Information Commissioner

The request was manifestly unreasonable due to the significant burden on the Council, which was grossly disproportionate to the value of the information to the public. The public interest in maintaining the exception outweighed the public interest in disclosure. The Council was in breach of its duty to provide...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Caroline Shah; Respondent: Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (general Regulatory Chamber) Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Environmental Information Regulations, Manifestly Unreasonable Requests, Public Interest Test, Duty to Provide Advice and Assistance
Environmental Law Information Law Administrative Law Environmental Information Regulations Manifestly Unreasonable Requests Public Interest Test Duty to Provide Advice and Assistance

Source-derived case record

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Caroline Shah

Appellant

Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (general Regulatory Chamber) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the request was manifestly unreasonable under regulation 12(4)(b) EIR
  2. 2 Whether the public interest in maintaining the exception outweighed the public interest in disclosure
  3. 3 Whether the Council complied with its duty to provide advice and assistance under regulation 9 EIR

Ratio Decidendi

The request was manifestly unreasonable due to the significant burden on the Council, which was grossly disproportionate to the value of the information to the public. The public interest in maintaining the exception outweighed the public interest in disclosure. The Council was in breach of its duty to provide advice and assistance under regulation 9 EIR but no steps were ordered as Ms Shah could now submit a more focused request.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • The public authority was entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) EIR to refuse the request.
  • The public authority was in breach of its duty to provide advice and assistance under regulation 9 EIR.