Patricia O’Hanlon v Information Commissioner & Anor

Patricia O’Hanlon v Information Commissioner & Anor

The First-tier Tribunal erred in law by restricting the scope of the appellant’s information request to 11 items when the plain wording was broader. This error was not material for some information, as exceptions to disclosure would have applied or the information was publicly available. However, the error was material regarding notification of contravention letters served against Amark, as the public interest balancing test under regulation 12(1)(b) was not applied. The matter is remitted to a fresh panel of the First-tier Tribunal for reconsideration limited to that issue.

Parties
Appellant: Patricia O’Hanlon; First Respondent: Information Commissioner; Second Respondent: Health and Safety Executive
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal From First Tier Tribunal (general Regulatory Chamber) (information Rights) / Upper Tribunal Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; FTT decision set aside in part and remitted for reconsideration.
Legal Topics
Environmental Information Regulations 2004, Freedom of Information Act 2000, Public Interest Test, Scope of Information Requests, Exceptions to Disclosure
Administrative Law Information Law Environmental Law Environmental Information Regulations 2004 Freedom of Information Act 2000 Public Interest Test Scope of Information Requests Exceptions to Disclosure

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patricia O’Hanlon

Appellant

Information Commissioner

First Respondent

Health and Safety Executive

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From First Tier Tribunal (general Regulatory Chamber) (information Rights) / Upper Tribunal Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant’s information request was restricted to 11 specified items or included all documents/correspondence held by HSE in relation to the site
  2. 2 Whether the First-tier Tribunal erred in law by restricting the scope of the request
  3. 3 Whether exceptions to disclosure under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 applied to specific documents

Ratio Decidendi

The First-tier Tribunal erred in law by restricting the scope of the appellant’s information request to 11 items when the plain wording was broader. This error was not material for some information, as exceptions to disclosure would have applied or the information was publicly available. However, the error was material regarding notification of contravention letters served against Amark, as the public interest balancing test under regulation 12(1)(b) was not applied. The matter is remitted to a fresh panel of the First-tier Tribunal for reconsideration limited to that issue.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; FTT decision set aside in part and remitted for reconsideration.

Orders

  • Case remitted to a freshly constituted panel of the First-tier Tribunal for reconsideration at an oral hearing limited to notification of contravention letters served against Amark.
  • FTT to determine the appeal in accordance with section 58 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and regulation 18 of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.