Kennedy (Appellant) v The Charity Commission (Respondent) – Supreme Court

Kennedy (Appellant) v The Charity Commission (Respondent) [2014] UKSC 20 (YouTube)

Supreme Court, 26th March 2014

Source: www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt

Comments Off

Kennedy v Information Commissioner and another (Secretary of State for Justice and others intervening) – WLR Daily

Kennedy v Information Commissioner and another (Secretary of State for Justice and others intervening) [2014] UKSC 20; [2014] WLR (D) 143

‘The Freedom of Information Act 2000 did not provide an exhaustive scheme in respect of the disclosure of information held by the Charity Commission relating to inquiries which they conducted. Although an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of that 2000 Act from disclosure under that Act lasted beyond the completion of such an inquiry, the question whether disclosure of information relating to such an inquiry was available would be governed by the Charities Act 1993, as substituted by the Charities Act 2006, construed in the light of common law principles.’

WLR Daily, 26th March 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

FOIA’s not all that: Kennedy v The Charity Commission [2014] UKSC 20 – Panopticon

‘The Supreme Court’s much anticipated judgments in Kennedy v The Charity Commission make for a long read. But they are very important. All the parties in Kennedy were represented by Counsel from 11KBW: Andrew Sharland for Mr Kennedy; Karen Steyn and Rachel Kamm for the Charity Commission and the Secretary of State; Ben Hooper for the ICO; and Christopher Knight for the Media Legal Defence Initiative and Campaign for Freedom of Information.’

Full story

Panopticon, 28th March 2014

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

Comments Off

Supreme Court: Strasbourg’s mixed messages about Article 10 and any right to receive information – UK Human Rights Blog

‘Kennedy v. Charity Commission et al, Supreme Court, 26 March 2014. In judgments running to 90 pages, the Supreme Court dismissed this appeal by Mr Kennedy, a Times journalist, for access to documents generated by the Charity Commission under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 concerning three inquiries between 2003 and 2005 into the Mariam Appeal. This appeal was George Galloway’s response to the sanctions imposed on Iraq following the first Gulf War, and little Mariam was a leukaemia sufferer. Mr Kennedy’s suspicion, amongst others, was that charitable funds had been used by Galloway for political campaigning.’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 26th March 2014

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Comments Off

Prince Charles, the Guardian and the Unreasonable Veto – Panopticon

‘As promised last week, this post contains a slightly fuller account of the Court of Appeal’s judgment in R (Evans) v HM Attorney General [2014] EWCA Civ 254. The history of the case is manifold and has been covered on this blog innumerable times (see: here, here and here). In essence, the Upper Tribunal held in a very lengthy judgment that some of the correspondence written by Prince Charles to various governmental departments ought to be disclosed in the public interest. The Attorney General then issued his statement of reasons under section 53 FOIA, which has the effect of vetoing the judicial decision. On any view, the veto is a highly unusual provision. The Divisional Court dismissed the judicial review of that veto. Mr Evans, a Guardian journalist, appealed.’

Full story

Panopticon, 18th March 2014

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

Comments Off

The Not Entirely Secret Diary of Mr Lansley – Panopticon

‘What considerations are relevant when deciding whether a Ministerial diary should be disclosed under FOIA? The decision of the First-tier Tribunal in Department of Health v Information Commissioner EA/2013/0087 is, perhaps surprisingly, the first Tribunal decision to address this issue. The judgment engages with a number of difficult issues: the Tribunal’s approach to Government evidence, the value of cross-examination in Tribunal hearings, aggregation of public interests under FOIA, and Parliamentary privilege. Hence it is of general importance, going beyond the intrinsic interest of its specific subject matter.’

Full story

Panopticon, 18th March 2014

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

Comments Off

CA says Prince Charles’ advocacy letters should be produced – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted March 17th, 2014 in appeals, disclosure, freedom of information, lobbying, news, royal family by tracey

‘R (o.t.a Rob Evans) v. Attorney-General, Information Commissioner Interested Party, 12 March 2014.The Court of Appeal (reversing a strong court including the former Lord Chief Justice – see my previous post) has decided that correspondence between the Prince of Wales and various government departments should be released. A Guardian journalist had made a request under the Freedom of Information Act and the Environmental Information Regulations to see these documents. The Upper Tribunal had agreed that they should be disclosed.’

Full story

Uk Human Rights Blog, 16th March 2014

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Comments Off

Metropolitan police strip searched more than 4,500 children in five years – The Guardian

Posted March 17th, 2014 in children, freedom of information, news, police, stop and search by tracey

‘More than 4,500 children as young as 10 have been strip searched by the Metropolitan police over the past five years, data released under the Freedom of Information Act shows. The figures obtained by the Guardian show 4,638 children aged between 10 and 16 were asked to remove their clothes and then searched by police between April 2008 and the end of last year. Just over a third were released by police without charge.’

Full story

The Guardian, 16th March 2014

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off

Regina (Evans) v Attorney General – WLR Daily

Regina (Evans) v Attorney General; [2014] EWCA Civ 254;  [2014] WLR (D)  124

‘The issue of a certificate by the Attorney General, an accountable person under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, of a certificate under section 53(2) of the Act so as to override and render ineffective a decision of an independent and impartial tribunal required more than that he merely disagreed with the tribunal’s determination. Examples of what would suffice were that there had been a material change of circumstances since the tribunal’s decision or that it was clearly flawed in fact or in law.’

WLR Daily, 12th March 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Prince Charles letters: attorney general acted unlawfully, say senior judges – The Guardian

‘Three senior judges have ruled that Dominic Grieve, the attorney general, acted unlawfully when he blocked the publication of letters written by Prince Charles to government ministers. The ruling, led by Lord Dyson, the head of the civil judiciary in England and Wales, paves the way for the release of the letters which reveal how the prince lobbied government ministers to change official policies.’

Full story

The Guardian, 12th March 2014

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off

Watchdog seeks greater clarity over public sector suppliers’ FOI responsibilities – OUT-LAW.com

‘The contracts agreed between public sector bodies and their suppliers should be “more explicit” about which one of the organisations holds information for the purposes of compliance with freedom of information (FOI) rules, the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has said.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 6th March 2014

Source: www.out-law.com

Comments Off

FOIA disclosures: ‘motive blindness’ and risks to mental health – Panopticon

Posted February 27th, 2014 in disclosure, freedom of information, mental health, news, tribunals by sally

‘Some FOIA ‘mantras’ frustrate requesters, such as judging matters as at the time of the request/refusal, regardless of subsequent events. Others tend to frustrate public authorities, such as ‘motive blindness’. A recent Tribunal discusses and illustrates both principles – in the context of the distress (including a danger to mental health) likely to arise from disclosure.’

Full story

Panopticon, 26th February 2014

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

Comments Off

Prince Charles’s letters: recipients’ identities must stay secret, say lawyers – The Guardian

Posted February 27th, 2014 in appeals, confidentiality, disclosure, freedom of information, news, royal family, veto by sally

‘The identities of the ministers who received confidential letters from Prince Charles promoting his personal views must remain concealed, government lawyers argued on Wednesday.’

Full story

The Guardian, 26th February 2014

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off

Decision to block Prince Charles’s letters challenged – BBC News

Posted February 25th, 2014 in appeals, attorney general, disclosure, freedom of information, news, royal family, veto by sally

‘A move by the government to block the release of letters from Prince of Wales to ministers are being challenged in the Court of Appeal.’

Full story

BBC News, 24th February 2014

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Comments Off

Freedom of Information: But What is Information? The Upper Tribunal Opines – Panopticon

Posted January 29th, 2014 in appeals, disclosure, documents, freedom of information, interpretation, news, tribunals by sally

‘We all know that section 1 gives us a right to request information from listed public authorities, but what does “information” mean? Information is defined by section 84 of FOIA (“‘information’ (subject to sections 51(8) and 75(2)) means information recorded in any form”). This somewhat opaque definition has generally been treated as meaning that a request is for information. It is not for copies of documents. If the public authority wants to type out the document in a different format, they can, so long as the information contained within that document is provided.’

Full story

Panopticon, 28th January 2014

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

Comments Off

UCAS and the extent of FOIA: Tribunal favours wide approach – Panopticon

‘Transparency advocates often express frustration at the number of bodies which are not within the scope of FOIA, because they are not listed or designated as ‘public authorities’ for FOIA purposes. The Coalition government responded by announcing, in January 2011, that FOIA would be extended to a number of additional bodies. This was done with effect from 1 November 2011, through the Freedom of Information (Designation as Public Authorities) Order 2011. This brought the Association of Chief Police Officers of England, Wales and Northern Ireland (ACPO); the Financial Ombudsman Service and the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS) within the scope of FOIA.’

Full story

Panopticon, 16th January 2014

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

Comments Off

Personal data: Tribunal analyses the ‘relates to’ and ‘identification’ limbs – Panopticon

Posted January 10th, 2014 in benefits, complaints, data protection, freedom of information, news, tribunals by tracey

‘I have commented in previous posts on how infrequently the Data Protection Act 1998 has been the subject of substantive litigation before the courts. One consequence of this is persistent uncertainty over how pivotal concepts such as “personal data” are to be analysed and approached. Last year, the High Court in Kelway v The Upper Tribunal, Northumbria Police and the Information Commissioner (2013) EWHC 2575 (Admin) considered how “personal data” issues should be approached.’

Full story

Panopticon, 9th January 2014

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

Comments Off

Proceedings brought by X – WLR Daily

Posted December 16th, 2013 in data protection, EC law, fees, fines, freedom of information, law reports by sally

Proceedings brought by X (Case C-486/12); [2013] WLR (D) 485

‘Article 12(a) of Parliament and Council Directive 95/46/EC of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data did not preclude the levying of fees in respect of the communication of personal data by a public authority. Pursuant to article 12(a), in order to ensure that fees levied when the right to access personal data was exercised were not excessive for the purposes of that provision, the level of those fees could not exceed the cost of communicating such data.’

WLR Daily, 12th December 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Prince Charles faces fresh challenge to secret communications with ministers – The Guardian

‘Prince Charles is to face a fresh challenge to his secret communication channel to government ministers when a court is asked to reveal whether he lobbied for an exemption to property laws affecting his £800m estate.’

Full story

The Guardian, 3rd December 2013

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off

APPGER in the Upper Tribunal – Panopticon

Posted November 25th, 2013 in appeals, freedom of information, human rights, news, rendition, tribunals by tracey

‘The Upper Tribunal has finally handed down its judgment in All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition v IC & Foreign and Commonwealth Office [2013] UKUT 560 (AAC). It is a judgment of Charles and Burnett JJ and Judge Wikeley. The appeal was from an FTT judgment which is analysed in detail by Rachel Kamm here. That post also contains the background to the case. In essence, the request was made by the APPGER for information relating to the participation of the UK in the practice of extraordinary rendition.’

Full story

Panopticon, 22nd November 2013

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

Comments Off