Paul John Calvert v Information Commissioner & Anor

Paul John Calvert v Information Commissioner & Anor

The First-tier Tribunal erred in law by treating Ms Young's second witness statement as unchallenged and discounting Mr Calvert's evidence without ensuring fair opportunity for challenge, particularly given his status as a litigant in person with health difficulties. The Tribunal also failed to adequately consider or explain why it could properly determine the issues without an oral hearing. These procedural errors materially influenced the outcome and require the decision to be set aside and remitted for reconsideration.

Parties
Appellant: Paul John Calvert; First Respondent: Information Commissioner; Second Respondent: Chief Constable of Northumbria Police
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Upper Tribunal Decision on Appeal From First Tier Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; First-tier Tribunal decision set aside for error of law.
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, Costs Exemption Under FOIA, Tribunal Procedure, Reasonable Adjustments
Administrative Law Freedom of Information Procedural Fairness Costs Exemption Under FOIA Tribunal Procedure Reasonable Adjustments

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul John Calvert

Appellant

Information Commissioner

First Respondent

Chief Constable of Northumbria Police

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Upper Tribunal Decision on Appeal From First Tier Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First-tier Tribunal erred in law by treating evidence as unchallenged and discounting the appellant's expertise
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal failed to consider or explain why it could properly determine the issues without an oral hearing
  3. 3 Whether procedural fairness was observed given the appellant's status as a litigant in person with health difficulties

Ratio Decidendi

The First-tier Tribunal erred in law by treating Ms Young's second witness statement as unchallenged and discounting Mr Calvert's evidence without ensuring fair opportunity for challenge, particularly given his status as a litigant in person with health difficulties. The Tribunal also failed to adequately consider or explain why it could properly determine the issues without an oral hearing. These procedural errors materially influenced the outcome and require the decision to be set aside and remitted for reconsideration.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; First-tier Tribunal decision set aside for error of law.

Orders

  • Decision of First-tier Tribunal under reference EA/2022/0201 set aside.
  • Case remitted to First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) for reconsideration by a freshly constituted panel.