Niall Wermter v The Information Commissioner & Anor

Niall Wermter v The Information Commissioner & Anor

The request was manifestly unreasonable under regulation 12(4)(b) EIR and vexatious under section 14 FOIA due to the appellant's course of conduct, including persistent, offensive, and threatening communications, which placed a disproportionate burden on the Council and caused distress to staff. The primary motive...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Niall Wermter; First Respondent: The Information Commissioner; Second Respondent: The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Camden
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Information Rights Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (general Regulatory Chamber) Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Environmental Information Regulations, Freedom of Information Act, Manifestly Unreasonable Requests, Vexatious Requests, Public Interest Test
Administrative Law Information Law Environmental Law Environmental Information Regulations Freedom of Information Act Manifestly Unreasonable Requests Vexatious Requests Public Interest Test

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 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Niall Wermter

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

First Respondent

The Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Camden

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Information Rights Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (general Regulatory Chamber) Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the request for information was manifestly unreasonable under regulation 12(4)(b) EIR
  2. 2 Whether the request was vexatious under section 14 FOIA
  3. 3 Whether the Council was entitled to rely on EIR rather than FOIA

Ratio Decidendi

The request was manifestly unreasonable under regulation 12(4)(b) EIR and vexatious under section 14 FOIA due to the appellant's course of conduct, including persistent, offensive, and threatening communications, which placed a disproportionate burden on the Council and caused distress to staff. The primary motive was to carry out a threat and seek revenge, not a legitimate public interest purpose. The public interest in maintaining the exception outweighed the public interest in disclosure.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed