VadeLab
Entrar
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber)·

Public Authority Ordered to Respond to Information Request After Tribunal Overturns Commissioner's Decision

Processo nº

📌 Em resumo

This case involved an appeal to the First-tier Tribunal about a request for information from a public body. The person asking for the information believed the Public Service Ombudsman for Wales (PSOW) held it, but the PSOW said they didn't. The Information Commissioner initially agreed with the PSOW. However, the Tribunal decided that the PSOW likely does hold the information and must now either provide it or explain why they can't, within 30 days.

⚖️ Tese Jurídica

A public authority must confirm whether it holds information requested under the Freedom of Information Act and either disclose it or issue a valid refusal notice.

Temas

Freedom of Information ActInformation Commissioner's decisionPublic authority obligationsInformation rights appeal

Dispositivos

section 10(1) Freedom of Information Act 2000section 17 Freedom of Information Act 2000rule 37(1) The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009

📖 O que diz a lei

Section 10(1), Freedom of Information Act 2000

This rule sets out a public authority's duty to respond to a request for information. It requires them to confirm whether they hold the requested information and, if they do, to either provide it or explain why they cannot. In this case, the public authority was found to have breached this rule by not properly confirming it held the information.

Section 17, Freedom of Information Act 2000

If a public authority decides not to release information, this rule requires them to send a formal 'refusal notice'. This notice must explain their decision and state which legal exemption allows them to withhold the information. The Tribunal ordered the public authority to issue such a notice if it chooses not to disclose the information.

Explicação em linguagem simples — não substitui orientação de um advogado.

📖 Resumo técnico

The First-tier Tribunal allowed an appeal against the Information Commissioner's decision, substituting it to find that a public authority held requested information under FOIA and breached section 10(1), ordering disclosure or a refusal notice.

📜 Ementa Documento oficial

The First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber), presided over by Judge Heald, allowed an appeal against the Information Commissioner's decision notice. The original request concerned information relating to complaints transferred from the Public Health Services Ombudsman to the Public Service Ombudsman for Wales (PSOW). The PSOW had initially stated it did not hold the information for FOIA purposes. The Tribunal, by consent and satisfying the overriding objective, substituted the Commissioner's decision, determining that on the balance of probabilities, the PSOW holds the information for FOIA purposes and breached section 10(1) of FOIA. The PSOW was ordered to issue a response confirming it holds the information and either disclose it or issue a refusal notice under s.17 FOIA within 30 calendar days.

📚 Inteiro teor Documento oficial

NCN: [2026] UKFTT 00926 (GRC) Case Reference: FT/EA/2026/0160 First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Information Rights Decided without a hearing Decision given on: 24 June 2026 Before JUDGE HEALD Between [APPELLANT] Appellant and THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER Respondent UPON the Appellant submitting a notice of appeal against the Respondent's ("the Commissioner's") decision notice IC-402911-F1J0 dated 27 March 2026 AND UPON the Commissioner reviewing the Appellant's grounds of appeal AND having noted that, by a response dated 8 May 2026, the Public Service Ombudsman for Wales, as the relevant public authority, has agreed to the Order below AND being satisfied, as required by rule 37(1) The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009, that it is appropriate that this Order is made AND being satisfied that making this Order would give effect to the overriding objective AND BY CONSENT IT IS ORDERED that:- 1. the appeal is allowed. 2. the Commissioner’s decision within his notice is substituted as follows: “1. The complainant requested copies of all information relating to two complaints which were transferred from the Public Health Services Ombudsman (PHSO) to the Public Service Ombudsman for Wales (PSOW) for investigation. PSOW stated that it did not hold the information for the purposes of FOIA. 2.The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, PSOW holds the information for the purposes of FOIA.

3. The Commissioner also determines that PSOW breached section 10(1) of FOIA.

4. PSOW must issue a response confirming that it holds the information for the purposes of FOIA, and either disclose that information or issue a refusal notice under s.17 FOIA.

5. The PSOW must take these steps within 30 calendar days of receiving this [substituted] decision notice. Failure to comply may result in a certification of this fact to the High Court and may be dealt with as a contempt of court" Signed Judge Heald Date: 18 June 2026

📊 Como os tribunais decidem casos parecidos

Entre 12 decisões semelhantes neste acervo:

Dismissed6 casos
Struck Out4 casos
Allowed in Part1 caso
Allowed1 caso

Panorama deste acervo — não é previsão do resultado do seu caso.

⚖️ O que costuma pesar em casos assim

✅ Costuma ser acolhido

  • The public authority's refusal notice did not properly explain the applicant's right to appeal.
  • The public authority did not adequately consider refinements or limitations to a request it deemed troublesome.

❌ Costuma ser rejeitado

  • The information request was part of a pattern of linked requests considered annoying or troublesome.
  • The public authority did not actually hold the information requested.
  • Releasing the information would unlawfully reveal personal details.
  • The public interest in keeping the information secret was stronger than the public interest in sharing it.
  • The person appealing failed to provide a necessary official decision notice.

Padrões observados nos casos semelhantes deste acervo — cada processo é único.

❓ Perguntas frequentes

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal decided that a public authority likely holds information requested under the Freedom of Information Act and must now respond properly, either by disclosing it or giving a valid reason for refusal.

Who was involved?

The person who made the information request (the appellant), the Information Commissioner (the respondent), and the Public Service Ombudsman for Wales (the public authority holding the information).

How did the court decide, and why?

The First-tier Tribunal allowed the appeal, overturning the Information Commissioner's original decision. It found that the public authority, on the balance of probabilities, held the information and had breached its duty under FOIA by not responding correctly.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The main laws applied were sections 10(1) and 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, which deal with the duty to confirm whether information is held and to issue refusal notices.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The central argument was whether the Public Service Ombudsman for Wales actually held the requested information, despite their initial claim that they did not. The Tribunal concluded they did.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the person who brought the case (the appellant), as their appeal was allowed.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

If a public authority claims not to hold information you've requested under FOIA, but you believe they do, you may have grounds to appeal to the Information Commissioner and potentially the First-tier Tribunal.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The key documents were the original information request, the public authority's response, the Information Commissioner's decision notice, and the appellant's grounds of appeal.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Decisions from the First-tier Tribunal can sometimes be appealed to the Upper Tribunal, but usually only with permission and on a point of law.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for your specific case, especially when dealing with complex legal processes like tribunal appeals and information rights.

Fonte oficial: First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) — ementa e inteiro teor reproduzidos das bases públicas do tribunal.Resumo, tese, resumo técnico e perguntas: elaborados por Inteligência Artificial com base na ementa e no acórdão oficiais.