Liying Yang v Information Commissioner

Liying Yang v Information Commissioner

The Tribunal has no jurisdiction under section 166 DPA to consider the substantive outcome of the Applicant's complaint or to order correction of information; its powers are limited to procedural issues, and no procedural error by the Commissioner was found. There is no reasonable prospect of the case succeeding.

Parties
Applicant: Liying Yang; Respondent: Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Data Protection Tribunal Appeal / Strike Out Application and Decision
Outcome
Proceedings struck out
Legal Topics
Section 166 Data Protection Act 2018, Procedural Powers of Tribunal, Scope of Tribunal Jurisdiction, Anonymity in Tribunal Proceedings
Data Protection Information Rights Section 166 Data Protection Act 2018 Procedural Powers of Tribunal Scope of Tribunal Jurisdiction Anonymity in Tribunal Proceedings

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Liying Yang

Applicant

Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Data Protection Tribunal Appeal / Strike Out Application and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider the substantive outcome of a complaint to the Information Commissioner under section 166 DPA
  2. 2 Whether there was a procedural failing by the Information Commissioner in handling the complaint
  3. 3 Whether the Applicant is entitled to anonymity

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal has no jurisdiction under section 166 DPA to consider the substantive outcome of the Applicant's complaint or to order correction of information; its powers are limited to procedural issues, and no procedural error by the Commissioner was found. There is no reasonable prospect of the case succeeding.

Court Disposition

Proceedings struck out

Orders

  • Proceedings are struck out under Rule 8(3)(c) for no reasonable prospect of success.
  • Application for anonymity refused; personal and private documents to be kept confidential under Rule 14(6) as previously directed.