Derek Moss v The Upper Tribunal

Derek Moss v The Upper Tribunal

The judge below erred in law by failing to engage with or explain the rejection of the appellant’s stated reason for seeking disclosure. The appellant’s reason, though brief, met the low threshold required to justify disclosure under the open justice principle. There were no countervailing factors such as harm or disproportionality. Therefore, the appellant was entitled to disclosure of the written submissions.

Parties
Appellant: Derek Moss; Respondent: The Upper Tribunal; Interested Party: The Information Commissioner; Interested Party: Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council; Interested Party: Liam Harron
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Upper Tribunal to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Open Justice, Access to Court Documents, Disclosure to Non Parties, Freedom of Information, Proportionality, Article 6 ECHR, Article 10 ECHR
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Information Law Open Justice Access to Court Documents Disclosure to Non Parties Freedom of Information Proportionality +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Derek Moss

Appellant

The Upper Tribunal

Respondent

The Information Commissioner

Interested Party

Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council

Interested Party

Liam Harron

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Upper Tribunal to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a non-party is entitled to disclosure of written submissions and skeleton arguments from tribunal proceedings under the open justice principle
  2. 2 Whether the refusal to provide such documents breached Article 6 and Article 10 ECHR rights

Ratio Decidendi

The judge below erred in law by failing to engage with or explain the rejection of the appellant’s stated reason for seeking disclosure. The appellant’s reason, though brief, met the low threshold required to justify disclosure under the open justice principle. There were no countervailing factors such as harm or disproportionality. Therefore, the appellant was entitled to disclosure of the written submissions.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The appellant is entitled to disclosure of the written submissions and skeleton arguments from the Harron case in the Upper Tribunal.