Peter Stead v Information Commissioner & Anor

Peter Stead v Information Commissioner & Anor

Although there is a legitimate interest in disclosure of the names of senior individuals involved in correspondence between the BBC and CIISA, and such disclosure is reasonably necessary for transparency, the specific circumstances of this case (as detailed in closed evidence) mean that the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subjects override the legitimate interest in disclosure. Therefore, disclosure would contravene the data protection principles and the BBC was entitled to withhold the information under section 40(2) FOIA.

Parties
Appellant: Peter Stead; Respondent: Information Commissioner; Respondent: The British Broadcasting Corporation
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Information Rights Appeal / Appeal Determination Without Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Personal Data, Legitimate Interest, Data Protection Principles, Section 40(2) FOIA
Information Law Data Protection Freedom of Information Personal Data Legitimate Interest Data Protection Principles Section 40(2) FOIA

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Stead

Appellant

Information Commissioner

Respondent

The British Broadcasting Corporation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Information Rights Appeal / Appeal Determination Without Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the BBC was entitled to rely on section 40(2) FOIA to withhold names and contact details from requested correspondence
  2. 2 Whether disclosure of names of senior individuals is necessary for legitimate interests
  3. 3 Whether such interests are overridden by the data subjects’ rights and freedoms

Ratio Decidendi

Although there is a legitimate interest in disclosure of the names of senior individuals involved in correspondence between the BBC and CIISA, and such disclosure is reasonably necessary for transparency, the specific circumstances of this case (as detailed in closed evidence) mean that the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subjects override the legitimate interest in disclosure. Therefore, disclosure would contravene the data protection principles and the BBC was entitled to withhold the information under section 40(2) FOIA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed