Hart v Information Commissioner [2025] UKFTT 62 (GRC) (23 January 2025)

Hart v Information Commissioner [2025] UKFTT 62 (GRC) (23 January 2025)

The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to order the ICO to take further procedural steps under section 166 DPA 2018 where the ICO has already investigated and issued an outcome; the applicant's challenge is an impermissible collateral attack on the merits of the ICO's decision, not a true procedural failing.

Citation
[2025] UKFTT 62 (GRC)
Parties
Applicant: Christopher Hart; Respondent: Information Commissioner (ICO)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
23 January 2025
Procedural Posture
First Tier Tribunal (general Regulatory Chamber) Information Rights / Strike Out Application; Pre Hearing
Outcome
Application struck out for lack of jurisdiction and no realistic prospect of success.
Legal Topics
Section 166 Data Protection Act 2018, Jurisdiction of Tribunal, Procedural Failings, ICO Investigative Discretion
Data Protection Information Rights Administrative Law Section 166 Data Protection Act 2018 Jurisdiction of Tribunal Procedural Failings ICO Investigative Discretion

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher Hart

Applicant

Information Commissioner (ICO)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

First Tier Tribunal (general Regulatory Chamber) Information Rights / Strike Out Application; Pre Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to order the ICO to take further procedural steps under section 166 DPA 2018 after an outcome has been issued
  2. 2 Whether the ICO failed to take appropriate procedural steps in response to the applicant's complaint
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's challenge is a collateral attack on the merits of the ICO's decision

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to order the ICO to take further procedural steps under section 166 DPA 2018 where the ICO has already investigated and issued an outcome; the applicant's challenge is an impermissible collateral attack on the merits of the ICO's decision, not a true procedural failing.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • The applicant’s application under section 166 DPA 2018 is struck out under Rule 8(2)(a) and Rule 8(3)(c).
  • The hearing on 9 April 2025 is vacated.