Jenna Corderoy v The Information Commissioner & Anor

Jenna Corderoy v The Information Commissioner & Anor

The Tribunal found that section 40(2) FOIA was properly applied as there was no lawful basis under data protection legislation to disclose the donor's identity or related personal data; the legitimate interests in disclosure did not outweigh the donor's privacy rights. Section 43(2) FOIA was also properly relied upon due to clear prejudice to the University's commercial interests. The appeal was dismissed as there was no error of law or discretion in the Commissioner's decision.

Parties
Appellant: Jenna Corderoy; First Respondent: The Information Commissioner; Second Respondent: The Governing Body of the University of Oxford
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Section 57 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 / Final Judgment After Full Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Personal Data Exemption, Commercial Interests Exemption, Public Interest Test, Data Subject Rights
Information Law Data Protection Law Administrative Law Freedom of Information Personal Data Exemption Commercial Interests Exemption Public Interest Test Data Subject Rights

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jenna Corderoy

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

First Respondent

The Governing Body of the University of Oxford

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Section 57 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 / Final Judgment After Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the identity of a major donor to the University of Oxford and related correspondence should be disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
  2. 2 Whether section 40(2) (personal data) and section 43(2) (commercial interests) exemptions were properly applied
  3. 3 Whether the legitimate interest in transparency outweighs the donor's privacy rights

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that section 40(2) FOIA was properly applied as there was no lawful basis under data protection legislation to disclose the donor's identity or related personal data; the legitimate interests in disclosure did not outweigh the donor's privacy rights. Section 43(2) FOIA was also properly relied upon due to clear prejudice to the University's commercial interests. The appeal was dismissed as there was no error of law or discretion in the Commissioner's decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed