Doug Paulley v Information Commissioner

Doug Paulley v Information Commissioner

The Tribunal has no jurisdiction under s.166 DPA 2018 to review or order further steps after the Respondent has issued a substantive outcome; only procedural defects prior to outcome are within scope, and the Applicant's challenge is outside the Tribunal's remit.

Parties
Appellant: Doug Paulley; Respondent: Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Strike Out Application
Outcome
case struck out
Legal Topics
Rectification Request, Procedural Jurisdiction, Complaint Handling, Data Protection Act 2018, S.166 DPA 2018
Data Protection Administrative Law Rectification Request Procedural Jurisdiction Complaint Handling Data Protection Act 2018 S.166 DPA 2018

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Doug Paulley

Appellant

Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction under s.166 DPA 2018 to require the Information Commissioner to take further steps after issuing an outcome?
  2. 2 Is the Applicant's challenge a procedural failure or a substantive challenge to the outcome?
  3. 3 Can the Tribunal review the substance of the Commissioner's decision under s.166 DPA 2018?

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal has no jurisdiction under s.166 DPA 2018 to review or order further steps after the Respondent has issued a substantive outcome; only procedural defects prior to outcome are within scope, and the Applicant's challenge is outside the Tribunal's remit.

Court Disposition

case struck out

Orders

  • The case is struck out under Rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009.