[reposted from LinkedIn]
I’m dumbfounded how a public authority, all of the staff at the Information Commissioner’s Office – including its litigation lawyers – and the three people hearing the appeal in the Information Tribunal, failed to identify that this request clearly should have been handled under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 and not the Freedom of Information Act 2000 – it’s about land use, a boundary dispute and planning. The ICO decision notice even states that “it relates to the status of the Council’s land adjacent to the complainant’s property”.
It may be that, on analysis, the request – which was refused on the grounds that it was vexatious – a decision with which both the ICO and Tribunal agreed – would have been considered manifestly unreasonable under the EIR, but that is no excuse. The refusal was wrong as a matter of law, the ICO decision notice is wrong as a matter of law, and the Tribunal judgment is wrong as a matter of law.
I have raised this issue before of public authorities, ICO and the Tribunal failing to deal with requests under the correct regime. I’m now minded to raise the issue formally with, at least, the ICO.
The views in this post (and indeed most posts on this blog) are my personal ones, and do not represent the views of any organisation I am involved with.
informationrightsandwrongs 