Robert Brialey v Information Commissioner

Robert Brialey v Information Commissioner

The ICO had acknowledged, considered, and provided an outcome to the applicant's complaint within the statutory period, fulfilling its procedural obligations under section 166. The Tribunal cannot make orders under section 166 once an outcome has been provided, and the proceedings have no reasonable prospect of success.

Parties
Applicant: Robert Brialey; Respondent: Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Application Under Data Protection Act 2018, Section 166 / Striking Out Decision
Outcome
Struck out
Legal Topics
Subject Access Request, Procedural Orders, ICO Complaint Handling
Data Protection Information Rights Subject Access Request Procedural Orders ICO Complaint Handling

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Brialey

Applicant

Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Data Protection Act 2018, Section 166 / Striking Out Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ICO failed to take appropriate procedural steps in handling the applicant's complaint under section 166 of the Data Protection Act 2018
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to make orders under section 166 after the ICO has provided an outcome

Ratio Decidendi

The ICO had acknowledged, considered, and provided an outcome to the applicant's complaint within the statutory period, fulfilling its procedural obligations under section 166. The Tribunal cannot make orders under section 166 once an outcome has been provided, and the proceedings have no reasonable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Struck out

Orders

  • The proceedings are struck out pursuant to Rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 because there is no reasonable prospect of the application succeeding.