Tribunal dismisses contempt application against Potto Parish Council

Tribunal Dismisses Contempt Application Against Potto Parish Council

The First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) has dismissed an application to certify contempt against Potto Parish Council. The case, brought by Gerry Woodhouse, centred on allegations of non-compliance with a substituted decision notice related to a Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) request.

On 7th June 2023, the Tribunal had allowed Mr Woodhouse's appeal against the Information Commissioner's decision, ruling that Potto Parish Council was not entitled to refuse his request for information on the grounds of it being vexatious under section 14(1) of the FOIA. The Council was instructed to issue a fresh response to the request without relying on section 14(1) within 35 days.

Subsequently, Mr Woodhouse applied for enforcement, claiming non-compliance by the Council. The Tribunal had previously addressed five out of seven parts of the request, with the remaining two requiring further response from the Council.

The outstanding requests involved financial details and advice related to alleged harassment. The Council provided responses that included financial documents and clarified its position on harassment allegations, stating that no recorded advice or evidence from third parties was held.

The Tribunal considered whether the Council had committed an act or omission amounting to contempt. It was noted that the Council had not ignored the decision notice and had responded to the Tribunal's directions. The issue was whether the Council had properly responded to the requests.

In relation to financial ledgers, the Tribunal found no evidence of additional ledgers being withheld. The Council had provided extensive financial information and demonstrated compliance with FOIA requirements.

Regarding the harassment-related request, the Tribunal accepted the Council's consistent assertion that no recorded information was held. The Council was not obligated to provide external information sources to the Applicant.

Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the burden of proof was not met by Mr Woodhouse to demonstrate non-compliance with the decision notice. The application to certify contempt was therefore dismissed.

Learn More

For more information on data protection, see BeCivil's guide to English Data Protection Law.