Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Tribunal held that the CPS did not hold the requested information in recorded form for parts 1-7, and that information within part 8 was properly exempt under section 30(1)(c) of FOIA, with the public interest in protecting the prosecution process outweighing the arguments for disclosure.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal dismissed an FOIA appeal about West Mercia Police corruption-intelligence statistics, holding section 31 law-enforcement exemptions were engaged and outweighed disclosure.
The tribunal refused a FOIA appeal seeking a police misconduct hearing bundle and transcript, holding section 31 applied and the public interest favoured withholding.
The tribunal allowed this FOIA appeal in part, narrowing reliance on sections 31, 38 and 40 and ordering the Home Office to issue a fresh response.
The First-tier Tribunal dismissed an EIR appeal for a consultant’s report on Thanet Parkway station costs, upholding commercial confidentiality and rejecting the emissions argument.
The tribunal dismissed an information rights appeal, holding that Camden could refuse the request as manifestly unreasonable under EIR and vexatious under FOIA.
The request was manifestly unreasonable due to the significant cost and officer resources required to comply, and the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the interest in disclosure. The Council's and Commissioner's handling of the request was procedurally fair, and regulation 12(4)(b) was correctly applied.
Source excerpt
The Council was not entitled to withhold the entirety of the Max Associates Report and PDG Report under s43(2) FOIA, as much of the information would not, or would only to a low degree, prejudice its commercial interests, and the public interest in transparency and accountability outweighed the exemption. The Council also failed to comply with its duty to provide information about the publication of the 2024 Leisure Charges. The Decision Notice was not in accordance with the law to the extent stated.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal dismissed English Heritage’s FOIA appeal, holding that section 43 was not engaged and that the public interest favoured disclosure despite section 36 being engaged.
The Tribunal found FOIA sections 36(2)(b)(ii) and 36(2)(c) were engaged for Southwark’s SEND funding documents, but ordered disclosure under the public interest test.
Explore more
