Donna Clarke v Information Commissioner

Donna Clarke v Information Commissioner

The Council was not entitled to withhold the Article 4 Direction report under regulations 12(3), 12(4)(e), or 12(5)(b) EIR because the exceptions were not engaged: the report was not covered by legal professional privilege, was not a purely internal communication at the time of the request, and disclosure of personal data (names of Councillors and Planning Manager) did not override the public interest in transparency. On the balance of probabilities, further information within the scope of the request was held and should be disclosed, subject to any applicable exceptions.

Parties
Appellant: Donna Clarke; Respondent: Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Environmental Information Regulations, Disclosure of Environmental Information, Legal Professional Privilege, Personal Data, Internal Communications
Information Rights Environmental Law Environmental Information Regulations Disclosure of Environmental Information Legal Professional Privilege Personal Data Internal Communications

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 7 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Donna Clarke

Appellant

Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Torridge District Council was entitled to withhold the Article 4 Direction report under EIR regulations 12(3), 12(4)(e), or 12(5)(b)
  2. 2 Whether further information within the scope of the request was held by the Council
  3. 3 Whether disclosure would adversely affect the course of justice or internal communications

Ratio Decidendi

The Council was not entitled to withhold the Article 4 Direction report under regulations 12(3), 12(4)(e), or 12(5)(b) EIR because the exceptions were not engaged: the report was not covered by legal professional privilege, was not a purely internal communication at the time of the request, and disclosure of personal data (names of Councillors and Planning Manager) did not override the public interest in transparency. On the balance of probabilities, further information within the scope of the request was held and should be disclosed, subject to any applicable exceptions.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Torridge District Council to disclose the Article 4 Direction report dated 12 July 2022 to the Appellant.
  • Torridge District Council to disclose the letter from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities dated 8 August 2022 and any other information held falling within part 2 of the request, subject to any exceptions relied upon.