James Mooney v The Information Commissioner

James Mooney v The Information Commissioner

The Tribunal found, on the balance of probabilities, that Lincolnshire County Council does not hold information within the scope of the request as landowner. The request was properly dealt with under the EIR, and the Council conducted adequate searches. There was no evidence to suggest the Council was withholding...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: James Mooney; Respondent: Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Decision Notice Under Section 57 FOIA as Modified by Regulation 18 EIR
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Environmental Information Regulations, Freedom of Information, Public Authority Obligations, Disclosure of Information
Information Law Environmental Law Administrative Law Environmental Information Regulations Freedom of Information Public Authority Obligations Disclosure of Information

Source-derived case record

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Mooney

Appellant

Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Decision Notice Under Section 57 FOIA as Modified by Regulation 18 EIR

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the requested information is environmental information under the EIR or should be dealt with under FOIA
  2. 2 Whether Lincolnshire County Council holds information within the scope of the request as landowner
  3. 3 Whether the Council conducted adequate searches for the requested information

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found, on the balance of probabilities, that Lincolnshire County Council does not hold information within the scope of the request as landowner. The request was properly dealt with under the EIR, and the Council conducted adequate searches. There was no evidence to suggest the Council was withholding information or that the Commissioner erred in law or discretion. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed