Chris Ness v Information Commissioner & Anor

Chris Ness v Information Commissioner & Anor

The requested information was held only by virtue of being contained in court documents created for the Coroner's inquiry, engaging the absolute exemption under section 32(1)(a) FOIA. Alternatively, section 41 FOIA applies as the information was obtained from the deceased in circumstances giving rise to an obligation of confidence, and disclosure would constitute an actionable breach of confidence with insufficient public interest to override the duty of confidence.

Parties
Appellant: Chris Ness; Respondent: Information Commissioner; Respondent: Chief Constable of Lancashire Constabulary
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 May 2024
Procedural Posture
Information Rights Appeal / Appeal Determination Without Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Exemptions Under FOIA, Court Documents, Confidential Information

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chris Ness

Appellant

Information Commissioner

Respondent

Chief Constable of Lancashire Constabulary

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Information Rights Appeal / Appeal Determination Without Hearing

  1. 1 Whether the Constabulary was entitled to rely on section 32(1)(a) and/or (c)(ii) FOIA to withhold the requested information
  2. 2 Whether the Constabulary was entitled to rely on section 41 FOIA or section 38 FOIA to withhold the requested information

Ratio Decidendi

The requested information was held only by virtue of being contained in court documents created for the Coroner's inquiry, engaging the absolute exemption under section 32(1)(a) FOIA. Alternatively, section 41 FOIA applies as the information was obtained from the deceased in circumstances giving rise to an obligation of confidence, and disclosure would constitute an actionable breach of confidence with insufficient public interest to override the duty of confidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed