Peter Tilson v The Information Commissioner

Peter Tilson v The Information Commissioner

Disclosure of the Council officer's name is not necessary to meet the legitimate interest pursued by the appellant, as alternative methods exist to obtain the relevant information without disclosing personal data. The officer's role as a communication link does not justify disclosure, and the reasonable expectation of privacy is not outweighed by the appellant's interest.

Parties
Appellant: Peter Tilson; Respondent: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Determination
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
FOIA Section 40(2), Personal Data, GDPR Article 6(1)(f), Legitimate Interest, Balancing Test
Information Rights Data Protection FOIA Section 40(2) Personal Data GDPR Article 6(1)(f) Legitimate Interest Balancing Test

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Tilson

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether disclosure of the Council officer's name is lawful under FOIA and UK GDPR
  2. 2 Whether the legitimate interest in disclosure outweighs the data subject's rights

Ratio Decidendi

Disclosure of the Council officer's name is not necessary to meet the legitimate interest pursued by the appellant, as alternative methods exist to obtain the relevant information without disclosing personal data. The officer's role as a communication link does not justify disclosure, and the reasonable expectation of privacy is not outweighed by the appellant's interest.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No substituted decision notice issued