Dransfield v IC & Devon County Council [2011] UKFTT EA_2010_0152 (GRC) (30 March 2011)
The Tribunal found that the requested information was not held by Devon County Council at the relevant time, as it was held by the contractor under a PFI agreement and the Council only had limited rights of access for compliance purposes. Therefore, the Council was not obliged to provide the information under FOIA.
- Citation
- [2011] UKFTT EA_2010_0152 (GRC)
- Parties
- Appellant: Alan Dransfield; First Respondent: Information Commissioner; Second Respondent: Devon County Council
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 30 March 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Final Decision After Paper Hearing
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Freedom of Information, Public Authority Records, Vexatious Requests, Private Finance Initiative
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Alan Dransfield
Appellant
Information Commissioner
First Respondent
Devon County Council
Second Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Decision After Paper Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the requested Operations Maintenance Manual was held by Devon County Council within the meaning of FOIA s.3
- 2 Whether the request was vexatious under FOIA s.14(1)
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the requested information was not held by Devon County Council at the relevant time, as it was held by the contractor under a PFI agreement and the Council only had limited rights of access for compliance purposes. Therefore, the Council was not obliged to provide the information under FOIA.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is rejected and the decision notice dated 25 August 2010 is upheld on grounds other than those contained in the decision notice.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment