David Chow v The Information Commissioner

David Chow v The Information Commissioner

The Tribunal found that the Commissioner correctly applied the personal data exemption under s40 FOIA to Part 4 of the Request. While the appellant pursued legitimate interests in transparency, disclosure of the requested personal data would be prejudicial to the rights and interests of the data subjects, given the confidential nature of the university disciplinary proceedings and the absence of a clear expectation of disclosure. The balance of interests did not favour disclosure.

Parties
Appellant: David Chow; Respondent: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Information Rights Appeal / Appeal From Decision Notice, Decided Without a Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Personal Data, University Disciplinary Proceedings, Transparency, Legitimate Interests Balancing
Information Law Data Protection Freedom of Information Personal Data University Disciplinary Proceedings Transparency Legitimate Interests Balancing

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Chow

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Information Rights Appeal / Appeal From Decision Notice, Decided Without a Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner correctly applied the personal data exemption under s40 FOIA to Part 4 of the Request
  2. 2 Whether the balance of legitimate interests favoured disclosure of personal data in the context of university disciplinary proceedings
  3. 3 Whether there was a reasonable expectation of disclosure for the data subjects involved

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the Commissioner correctly applied the personal data exemption under s40 FOIA to Part 4 of the Request. While the appellant pursued legitimate interests in transparency, disclosure of the requested personal data would be prejudicial to the rights and interests of the data subjects, given the confidential nature of the university disciplinary proceedings and the absence of a clear expectation of disclosure. The balance of interests did not favour disclosure.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed