Marshall v Information Commissioner & Anor [2025] UKFTT 288 (GRC) (11 March 2025)
The Tribunal found the request vexatious due to the unreasonable burden on the Trust from a long history of requests, the tangential and diminishing value of the information sought, and the fact that the core issues had been addressed years earlier. The right to information under FOIA is not to be used as a tool for personal campaigns or compensation claims. The Commissioner's decision was correct and lawful.
- Citation
- [2025] UKFTT 288 (GRC)
- Parties
- Appellant: Peter Marshall; First Respondent: The Information Commissioner; Second Respondent: The London Ambulance Service NHS Trust
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 11 March 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Under Freedom of Information Act 2000 (foia) S57 / Final Decision on the Papers
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Freedom of Information, Vexatious Requests, Public Authority Obligations, Appeals Process
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Peter Marshall
Appellant
The Information Commissioner
First Respondent
The London Ambulance Service NHS Trust
Second Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Freedom of Information Act 2000 (foia) S57 / Final Decision on the Papers
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant's FOIA request was vexatious under s14(1)
- 2 Whether the Information Commissioner's decision to uphold the refusal was lawful
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found the request vexatious due to the unreasonable burden on the Trust from a long history of requests, the tangential and diminishing value of the information sought, and the fact that the core issues had been addressed years earlier. The right to information under FOIA is not to be used as a tool for personal campaigns or compensation claims. The Commissioner's decision was correct and lawful.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
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