Bristol City Council v Information Commissioner: FOIA compliance enforcement upheld

The First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) has dismissed Bristol City Council's appeal against an Information Commissioner's Office enforcement notice, reinforcing statutory obligations under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The judgement, delivered on 6 August 2025, establishes important precedent regarding ICO enforcement powers and public authority compliance expectations.

The enforcement notice stemmed from Bristol City Council's systematic failure to respond to information requests within the statutory 20 working day timeframe mandated by section 10(1) FOIA. The ICO documented 62 formal complaints against the Council over two years, demonstrating persistent non-compliance with fundamental transparency obligations.

Procedural background

The ICO initially issued a practice recommendation on 30 August 2023, requiring the Council to improve response times and implement specific compliance measures. Despite this intervention, response rates remained inadequate, prompting formal enforcement action on 14 March 2024.

The Council's appeal centred on technical arguments regarding the enforcement notice's wording. Bristol City Council contended that the practice recommendation had not explicitly required a recovery plan for existing backlogs, arguing this omission affected the proportionality and justification of subsequent enforcement measures.

Tribunal analysis

The Tribunal rejected these arguments, determining that explicit reference to backlogs was unnecessary. The judgement emphasised that public authorities must achieve substantive compliance with FOIA requirements, regardless of specific procedural directions in preliminary recommendations.

Significantly, the Tribunal recognised the ICO's enforcement discretion, finding that issuing the enforcement notice constituted a reasonable and proportionate response to documented compliance failures. This recognition strengthens the ICO's regulatory position in addressing persistent non-compliance by public bodies.

Compliance expectations

The judgement reinforces that public authorities must maintain 90% compliance rates for FOIA responses, establishing clear performance benchmarks. The Tribunal emphasised that timely responses protect requesters' fundamental rights and maintain public confidence in governmental transparency mechanisms.

The decision clarifies that enforcement action serves both corrective and deterrent functions, encouraging broader compliance across the public sector. Public authorities cannot rely on resource constraints or administrative difficulties to justify systematic non-compliance with statutory obligations.

Regulatory implications

This case demonstrates the ICO's willingness to pursue formal enforcement against persistently non-compliant authorities, moving beyond advisory recommendations when necessary. The Tribunal's support for ICO discretion suggests regulators have substantial latitude in determining appropriate enforcement responses.

The judgement particularly emphasises institutional accountability, noting that compliance failures can significantly undermine public trust in governmental bodies. This recognition aligns enforcement action with broader constitutional principles regarding governmental transparency and democratic accountability.

Wider significance

The decision serves as a stark reminder that public authorities must prioritise FOIA compliance within operational frameworks. Systematic delays not only breach statutory obligations but potentially compromise the fundamental right of access to public information.

Bristol City Council v Information Commissioner establishes that enforcement notices will be upheld where public authorities demonstrate persistent non-compliance, regardless of technical arguments about procedural deficiencies in preliminary recommendations. The judgement reinforces the principle that substantive compliance with transparency obligations cannot be compromised by administrative convenience or resource limitations.

This precedent will likely influence ICO enforcement strategies and encourage proactive compliance measures across public sector organisations facing similar challenges with information request processing.