Rabbi Gabriel Kanter-Webber v The Information Commissioner & Anor

Rabbi Gabriel Kanter-Webber v The Information Commissioner & Anor

A police misconduct panel does not exercise the judicial power of the state and therefore is not a court within the meaning of section 32(4)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000; the First-tier Tribunal erred in law by focusing on the functions of police officers rather than the panel's functions, and by relying on procedural 'trappings' rather than substantive powers.

Parties
Appellant: Rabbi Gabriel Kanter-Webber; First Respondent: The Information Commissioner; Second Respondent: The Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Upper Tribunal Judgment Remitting to First Tier Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; First-tier Tribunal decision set aside; case remitted to First-tier Tribunal with directions.
Legal Topics
FOIA Section 32 Exemption, Definition of Court, Police Misconduct Panels, Statutory Interpretation, Judicial Power of the State
Administrative Law Freedom of Information FOIA Section 32 Exemption Definition of Court Police Misconduct Panels Statutory Interpretation Judicial Power of the State

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 24 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rabbi Gabriel Kanter-Webber

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

First Respondent

The Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Upper Tribunal Judgment Remitting to First Tier Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a police misconduct panel (PMP) is a court for purposes of section 32(4)(a) of FOIA
  2. 2 Whether the First-tier Tribunal erred in law by finding a PMP is a court
  3. 3 Application of the Barras principle to statutory interpretation

Ratio Decidendi

A police misconduct panel does not exercise the judicial power of the state and therefore is not a court within the meaning of section 32(4)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000; the First-tier Tribunal erred in law by focusing on the functions of police officers rather than the panel's functions, and by relying on procedural 'trappings' rather than substantive powers.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; First-tier Tribunal decision set aside; case remitted to First-tier Tribunal with directions.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The First-tier Tribunal's decision dated 30 January 2024 is set aside.