Tinling v The Information Commissioner & Anor [2025] UKFTT 871 (GRC) (21 July 2025)

Tinling v The Information Commissioner & Anor [2025] UKFTT 871 (GRC) (21 July 2025)

On the balance of probabilities, the Council did not hold any further information within the scope of the appellant's requests at the time the requests were made; the Information Commissioner correctly applied the legal test and was entitled to accept the Council's responses; the Tribunal's jurisdiction does not extend to reviewing the Commissioner's investigative conduct; the appeals are dismissed.

Citation
[2025] UKFTT 871 (GRC)
Parties
Appellant: Alan Tinling; First Respondent: The Information Commissioner; Second Respondent: London Borough of Waltham Forest
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
21 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal (information Rights) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Environmental Information Regulations, Freedom of Information, Disclosure Obligations, Retention of Records, Statutory Interpretation
Information Rights Environmental Law Administrative Law Environmental Information Regulations Freedom of Information Disclosure Obligations Retention of Records Statutory Interpretation

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Tinling

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

First Respondent

London Borough of Waltham Forest

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (information Rights) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Council held further information within the scope of the appellant's requests under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004
  2. 2 Whether the Information Commissioner correctly applied the balance of probabilities test in determining if further information was held
  3. 3 Whether the Council's searches and responses satisfied statutory duties under EIR

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities, the Council did not hold any further information within the scope of the appellant's requests at the time the requests were made; the Information Commissioner correctly applied the legal test and was entitled to accept the Council's responses; the Tribunal's jurisdiction does not extend to reviewing the Commissioner's investigative conduct; the appeals are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed