Wayne Leighton v The Information Commissioner

Wayne Leighton v The Information Commissioner

The tribunal lacks jurisdiction because the applicant did not make a complaint to the Commissioner under section 165 of the Data Protection Act 2018, so the Commissioner was not required to take steps under section 165(4), and section 166 does not provide a mechanism to challenge the outcome of a subject access request.

Parties
Applicant: Wayne Leighton; Respondent: The Information Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 March 2026
Procedural Posture
Information Rights Appeal / Strike Out Application Determination
Outcome
Application struck out for lack of jurisdiction and no reasonable prospect of success.
Legal Topics
Subject Access Request, Jurisdiction, Section 132 Data Protection Act 2018, Section 165 Data Protection Act 2018, Section 166 Data Protection Act 2018, Tribunal Procedure
Data Protection Information Rights Subject Access Request Jurisdiction Section 132 Data Protection Act 2018 Section 165 Data Protection Act 2018 Section 166 Data Protection Act 2018 Tribunal Procedure

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wayne Leighton

Applicant

The Information Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Information Rights Appeal / Strike Out Application Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the appeal under section 166 of the Data Protection Act 2018
  2. 2 Whether the applicant made a valid complaint to the Commissioner under section 165 of the Data Protection Act 2018
  3. 3 Whether the Commissioner was required to take steps under section 165(4) of the Data Protection Act 2018

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal lacks jurisdiction because the applicant did not make a complaint to the Commissioner under section 165 of the Data Protection Act 2018, so the Commissioner was not required to take steps under section 165(4), and section 166 does not provide a mechanism to challenge the outcome of a subject access request.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • The application is struck out under rule 8(2)(a) for lack of jurisdiction and under rule 8(3)(c) because it has no reasonable prospect of success.