Rhodalyn Wadie v The Information Commissioner

Rhodalyn Wadie v The Information Commissioner

The Tribunal has no jurisdiction under section 166 DPA 2018 to order the Information Commissioner to re-investigate or issue further directions after an outcome has been provided, as section 166 is limited to procedural failings and the Commissioner has broad discretion in investigations. No procedural failing was identified, and the applicant's dissatisfaction with the outcome does not confer jurisdiction or a reasonable prospect of success.

Parties
Applicant: Rhodalyn Wadie; Respondent: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Application Under Data Protection Act 2018, S166(2) / Strike Out Decision, Decided Without a Hearing
Outcome
Application struck out for want of jurisdiction and no reasonable prospect of success.
Legal Topics
Data Subject Access Request, Procedural Remedies, Tribunal Jurisdiction, Information Rights
Data Protection Administrative Law Data Subject Access Request Procedural Remedies Tribunal Jurisdiction Information Rights

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rhodalyn Wadie

Applicant

The Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Data Protection Act 2018, S166(2) / Strike Out Decision, Decided Without a Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction under s166 DPA 2018 to order the Information Commissioner to re-investigate a complaint or issue further directions after an outcome has been provided
  2. 2 Whether the Information Commissioner failed to take appropriate procedural steps in handling the applicant's complaint

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal has no jurisdiction under section 166 DPA 2018 to order the Information Commissioner to re-investigate or issue further directions after an outcome has been provided, as section 166 is limited to procedural failings and the Commissioner has broad discretion in investigations. No procedural failing was identified, and the applicant's dissatisfaction with the outcome does not confer jurisdiction or a reasonable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Application struck out for want of jurisdiction and no reasonable prospect of success.

Orders

  • The application is struck out under Rule 8(2)(a) because the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to deal with it.
  • The application is struck out under Rule 8(3)(a) because there is no reasonable prospect of it succeeding.