UK Case Law — Latest Judgments (Find Case Law)

Andrew White v Information Commissioner Appeal Dismissed

Andrew White appealed to the First-tier Tribunal against the Information Commissioner's Decision Notice (IC-361512-G7G5) upholding Croydon Council's refusal to disclose a Final Certificate under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004. The Tribunal dismissed all seven grounds of appeal on 9 September 2025. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's 'established position' that building control certificates relating to occupied properties constitute personal data of the owner or occupier under UK GDPR, and held that disclosure was not 'necessary' because the Council already makes building control and planning information available through statutory registers. The ruling clarifies the interaction between EIR access rights and data protection obligations for public authorities holding environmental information about private properties.

Andrew White v Information Commissioner — Appeal Struck Out, Section 166 DPA Limits

The First-tier Tribunal struck out Andrew White's appeal against the Information Commissioner's Office, holding that Section 166 DPA 2018 confers only procedural jurisdiction and cannot be used to challenge the substantive merits of an ICO complaint outcome. The appellant had sought an order requiring the Commissioner to issue a supplementary reasoned decision regarding 23andMe's transfer of genetic data following the company's bankruptcy. The tribunal confirmed that judicial review in the High Court is the appropriate forum for challenging substantive ICO decisions.

Dr RJ Abrahart v The Information Commissioner & Anor - FOIA Vexatious Request Appeal Dismissed

The First-tier Tribunal dismissed Dr RJ Abrahart's appeal against the Information Commissioner's combined Decision Notices (IC-375980-K8P9, IC-376471-J6J9, IC-376716-C1Q2) dated 20 October 2025. The Tribunal upheld the Department for Education's refusal to respond to two FOIA requests under s.14(1) FOIA, finding the requests formed part of a vexatious course of conduct that imposed a disproportionate burden on departmental resources. Despite recognising RJA's genuine motivation and polite correspondence, the Tribunal applied the Dransfield four-factor test holistically and concluded the requests met the high standard for vexatiousness.