Savic v ICO & Ors

Savic v ICO & Ors

The public interest in maintaining the confidentiality of instructions for and legal advice relating to an issue of particular complexity, sensitivity, and constitutional importance outweighs the public interest in disclosure, especially given ongoing or potential litigation and the continuing relevance of the exemptions under sections 35(1)(c) and 42(1) of FOIA.

Parties
Appellant: Savic; First Respondent: Information Commissioner's Office (ICO); Second Respondent: Attorney General's Office (AGO); Third Respondent: Cabinet Office (CO)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 November 2016
Procedural Posture
FOIA Appeal / Upper Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information Act 2000, Legal Professional Privilege, Law Officers’ Advice, International Relations Exemption

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Savic

Appellant

Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)

First Respondent

Attorney General's Office (AGO)

Second Respondent

Cabinet Office (CO)

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

FOIA Appeal / Upper Tribunal Decision

  1. 1 Whether the exemptions under sections 35(1)(c), 42(1), and 27(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 apply to the requested information
  2. 2 Whether the public interest in disclosure outweighs the public interest in maintaining the exemptions

Ratio Decidendi

The public interest in maintaining the confidentiality of instructions for and legal advice relating to an issue of particular complexity, sensitivity, and constitutional importance outweighs the public interest in disclosure, especially given ongoing or potential litigation and the continuing relevance of the exemptions under sections 35(1)(c) and 42(1) of FOIA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeals against the AGO Decision and the CO Decision (insofar as it relates to the s. 42 document) are dismissed.