Stephen Purden v the The Information Commissioner

Stephen Purden v the The Information Commissioner

The Tribunal found that at the time of Mr Purden's request, a discrete HIF publication scheme did not exist and the Trust managed a single publication scheme covering both itself and HIF. There was no evidence that the requested information was held. The Tribunal also found that service of the Decision Notice could be deemed to have been made on the correct public authority and there was no error of law or incorrect exercise of discretion by the Commissioner.

Parties
Appellant: Stephen Purden; Respondent: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Publication Schemes, Jurisdiction, Public Authority Definition
Information Law Administrative Law Freedom of Information Publication Schemes Jurisdiction Public Authority Definition

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

Stephen Purden

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the public authority held the requested information under section 1(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 at the time of the request
  2. 2 Whether the Decision Notice was served on the correct legal entity/public authority
  3. 3 Whether the Information Commissioner and Tribunal applied the correct legal test in determining if information was held

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that at the time of Mr Purden's request, a discrete HIF publication scheme did not exist and the Trust managed a single publication scheme covering both itself and HIF. There was no evidence that the requested information was held. The Tribunal also found that service of the Decision Notice could be deemed to have been made on the correct public authority and there was no error of law or incorrect exercise of discretion by the Commissioner.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed