Peter Webb v The Information Commissioner

Peter Webb v The Information Commissioner

The Tribunal found that, considering the history, context, and burden of previous requests, the Appellant's request imposed a significant and unreasonable burden on the Council, was disproportionate, and amounted to a manifestly unjustified and improper use of FOIA. The Tribunal concluded that the Council was entitled to rely on section 14(1) to refuse the request and that the Information Commissioner made no error in law or discretion.

Parties
Appellant: Peter Webb; Respondent: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Vexatious Requests, Public Authority Accountability
Information Law Administrative Law Freedom of Information Vexatious Requests Public Authority Accountability

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

Parties

Peter Webb

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Council was entitled to rely on section 14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to refuse the information request as vexatious
  2. 2 Whether the Information Commissioner erred in law or discretion in upholding the Council's refusal
  3. 3 Whether the Council's use of a 'blanket' refusal letter was lawful

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that, considering the history, context, and burden of previous requests, the Appellant's request imposed a significant and unreasonable burden on the Council, was disproportionate, and amounted to a manifestly unjustified and improper use of FOIA. The Tribunal concluded that the Council was entitled to rely on section 14(1) to refuse the request and that the Information Commissioner made no error in law or discretion.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed