Hugh Craddock v The Information Commissioner

Hugh Craddock v The Information Commissioner

The Tribunal found that the information requested was both publicly available and easily accessible to the appellant in another form or format, as required by Regulation 6(1)(b) EIR. The Council was therefore entitled to refuse the request in the format sought. The Tribunal rejected the argument that accessibility required the ability to capture and retain the information for personal use outside the Searchroom. The Tribunal also found that the information was exempt from disclosure under FOIA by virtue of section 21, as it was reasonably accessible to the appellant.

Parties
Appellant: Hugh Craddock; Respondent: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Environmental Information Regulations, Freedom of Information Act, Public Access to Information, Disclosure of Environmental Information, Reasonable Accessibility, Form and Format of Information
Information Law Environmental Law Administrative Law Environmental Information Regulations Freedom of Information Act Public Access to Information Disclosure of Environmental Information Reasonable Accessibility +1 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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hugh Craddock

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the requested environmental information is 'publicly available and easily accessible' under Regulation 6(1)(b) EIR
  2. 2 Whether the Council was entitled to refuse disclosure in the requested format
  3. 3 Whether the information should be disclosed under FOIA if not under EIR

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the information requested was both publicly available and easily accessible to the appellant in another form or format, as required by Regulation 6(1)(b) EIR. The Council was therefore entitled to refuse the request in the format sought. The Tribunal rejected the argument that accessibility required the ability to capture and retain the information for personal use outside the Searchroom. The Tribunal also found that the information was exempt from disclosure under FOIA by virtue of section 21, as it was reasonably accessible to the appellant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The Decision Notice is upheld.