Dr Chrisostomos Prodromou v The Information Commissioner

Dr Chrisostomos Prodromou v The Information Commissioner

The request was not part of the series of grievance-related requests, did not carry a significant burden, had no inappropriate motive, and there was no evidence of harassment or distress. The lack of wider public interest did not render the request vexatious. Therefore, section 14 exemption did not apply.

Parties
Appellant: Dr Chrisostomos Prodromou; Respondent: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Information Rights Appeal / Appeal Determination on the Papers
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Vexatious Requests, Section 14 FOIA, Appeals Process
Freedom of Information Administrative Law Vexatious Requests Section 14 FOIA Appeals Process

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 1 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Chrisostomos Prodromou

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Information Rights Appeal / Appeal Determination on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the University was entitled to rely on section 14 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to refuse the request as vexatious

Ratio Decidendi

The request was not part of the series of grievance-related requests, did not carry a significant burden, had no inappropriate motive, and there was no evidence of harassment or distress. The lack of wider public interest did not render the request vexatious. Therefore, section 14 exemption did not apply.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The University shall provide Dr Prodromou with a fresh response to the request which does not rely on section 14 FOIA within 42 days of the date this decision is sent to the University.