Tony Mason v The Information Commissioner & Anor

Tony Mason v The Information Commissioner & Anor

The Tribunal found that the London Borough of Barnet lawfully withheld the requested information under regulations 12(5)(e) and 13 EIR, as the information was commercial in nature, confidential, and its disclosure would adversely affect commercial interests. The Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to rule on breaches of the Local Government Act 1972 and found no evidence of intentional concealment or wrongdoing. The public interest test was properly applied, and the Appellant failed to demonstrate any error of law in the Decision Notice.

Parties
Appellant: Tony Mason; First Respondent: Information Commissioner; Second Respondent: London Borough of Barnet
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Environmental Information Regulations, Data Protection, Local Government Access to Information
Information Law Administrative Law Environmental Law Freedom of Information Environmental Information Regulations Data Protection Local Government Access to Information

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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tony Mason

Appellant

Information Commissioner

First Respondent

London Borough of Barnet

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether London Borough of Barnet lawfully withheld information under regulations 12(5)(e) and 13 of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR)
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to rule on breaches of the Local Government Act 1972
  3. 3 Whether the public interest test under EIR was properly applied

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the London Borough of Barnet lawfully withheld the requested information under regulations 12(5)(e) and 13 EIR, as the information was commercial in nature, confidential, and its disclosure would adversely affect commercial interests. The Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to rule on breaches of the Local Government Act 1972 and found no evidence of intentional concealment or wrongdoing. The public interest test was properly applied, and the Appellant failed to demonstrate any error of law in the Decision Notice.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed