Charlie Smith v The Information Commissioner & Anor

Charlie Smith v The Information Commissioner & Anor

The Tribunal found that the respondents failed to demonstrate a real, actual, and substantial risk of prejudice arising from disclosure of the requested information. No causal link or material evidence was provided to show that releasing the total numbers of officers on duty for a single night would prejudice law enforcement interests, even considering the mosaic effect. The information related to an exceptional event (the Coronation), and the context did not support the claimed risk. Therefore, the Section 31 exemption was not properly engaged, and the public interest favoured disclosure.

Parties
Appellant: Charlie Smith; First Respondent: The Information Commissioner; Second Respondent: Chief Constable of West Midlands Police
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 July 2025
Procedural Posture
FOIA Appeal / First Tier Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Law Enforcement Exemptions, Public Interest Test
Information Law 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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charlie Smith

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

First Respondent

Chief Constable of West Midlands Police

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

FOIA Appeal / First Tier Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Section 31(1)(a) and (b) FOIA exemptions are properly engaged for the requested information
  2. 2 Whether disclosure of police staffing numbers for a specific night shift would, or would be likely to, prejudice law enforcement interests
  3. 3 Whether the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the respondents failed to demonstrate a real, actual, and substantial risk of prejudice arising from disclosure of the requested information. No causal link or material evidence was provided to show that releasing the total numbers of officers on duty for a single night would prejudice law enforcement interests, even considering the mosaic effect. The information related to an exceptional event (the Coronation), and the context did not support the claimed risk. Therefore, the Section 31 exemption was not properly engaged, and the public interest favoured disclosure.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The Second Respondent must disclose within 30 days the total number of response officers and supporting officers on duty in the West Midlands during the night shift of May 8, 2023.