Jennifer Thelen

1. Freedom of Information
and Data Protection
Case Law Update 2015
Jennie Thelen

2. Personal Data
• Edem v Information Commissioner:
– Mr Edem sought all information the FSA held
about him and “his complaint that the [FSA]
had failed to correctly regulate Egg PLC.”
– Focus: personal data of junior employees

3. Personal Data
• FOIA Section 1:
“Personal Data” means data which relate to a living
individual who can be identified –
(a) From those data, or
(b) From those data and other information which is in the
possession of, or is likely to come into the possession
of, the data controller,
And includes any expression of opinion about the individual
and any indication of the intentions of the data controller or
any other person in respect of the individual.”

4. Personal Data
• Durant: Auld LJ’s two notions:
“The first is whether the information is biographical in a significant
sense, that is, going beyond the recording of the putative data subject’s
involvement in a matter or an event that has no personal connotations,
a life event of which his privacy could not be said to be compromised.
The second is one of focus. The information should have the putative
data subject as its focus rather than some other person with whom he
may have been involved or some other transaction or event in which he
may have figured or have had an interest, for example, as in this case,
an investigation into some other person’s or body’s conduct that he
may have investigated. In short, it is information that affects his
privacy, whether in his personal or family life, business or professional
capacity.”

5. Personal Data
• AB (Chief Constable) – references
• Surrey Heath – children/social media
• AB (Education) – child protection referrals

6. Held
• FOIA s 3(2):
“For the purposes of this Act, information is held by a
public authority if – (a) it is held by the authority, otherwise
than on behalf of another person; or (b) it is held by another
person on behalf of the authority.”
• Geraldine Hackett v IC and United
Learning Trust

7. Vexatious Litigants
• FOIA s.14
“(1) Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to
comply with a request for information if the request is
vexatious.
(2) Where a public authority has previously complied with a
request for information which was made by any person, it is
not obliged to comply with a subsequent identical or
substantially similar request from that person unless a
reasonable interval has elapsed between compliance with
the previous request and the making of the current
request.”

8. Vexatious Litigants
• EIR 12(4)
“For the purposes of paragraph 1(a), a public authority may
refuse to disclose information to the extent that –
(b) The request for information is manifestly
unreasonable.”

9. Vexatious Litigants
• Dransfield Guidance:
– Burden
– Motive
– Value/serious purpose of the request
– Harassment

10. Damages
• DPA s13
“(1) An individual who suffers age by reason of any contravention by a
data controller of any of the requirements of this Act is entitled to
compensation from the data controller for that damage.
(2) An individual who suffers distress by reason of any contravention by
a data controller of any of the requirements of this Act is entitled to
compensation from the data controller for that distress if (a) the
individual also suffers damage by reason of the contravention, or (b)
the contravention relates to the processing of personal data for the
special purposes.”

11. Property Charges
EIR Reg. 8
“(1) … where a public authority makes environmental information
available in accordance with regulation 5(1) the authority may charge
the applicant for making the information available.
(2) A public authority shall not make any charge for allowing an
applicant – (a) to access any public registers or lists of environmental
information held by the public authority; or (b) to examine the
information requested at the place which the public authority makes
available for that examination.
(3) A charge under paragraph (1) shall not exceed an amount which the
public authority is satisfied is a reasonable amount.”

12. Supreme Court
R (Evans) v Information Commissioner
Kennedy v Charity Commissioner