Mark Tully v The Information Commissioner

Mark Tully v The Information Commissioner

Requests 4 and 5 of the appellant's information request were vexatious due to the disproportionate burden of compliance relative to their limited value, justifying reliance on section 14 FOIA. Requests 1-3 were not vexatious as they imposed no significant burden and should not have been refused under section 14.

Parties
Appellant: Mark Tully; Respondent: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (general Regulatory Chamber) Decision on the Papers
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Vexatious Requests, Section 14 FOIA, Public Authority Disclosure, Loan Charge

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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Tully

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (general Regulatory Chamber) Decision on the Papers

  1. 1 Whether HM Treasury was entitled to rely on section 14 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to refuse parts of the appellant's information request as vexatious.

Ratio Decidendi

Requests 4 and 5 of the appellant's information request were vexatious due to the disproportionate burden of compliance relative to their limited value, justifying reliance on section 14 FOIA. Requests 1-3 were not vexatious as they imposed no significant burden and should not have been refused under section 14.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • HM Treasury were not entitled to rely on section 14 FOIA for requests 1-3 made on 1 February 2022.
  • HM Treasury were entitled to rely on section 14 FOIA for requests 4 and 5 made on 1 February 2022.