EA-2023-0405 - [2024] UKFTT 00700 (GRC)
Fecha: 30-Jul-2024
Evidence
Evidence
We read and took account of an open and a closed bundle. The closed bundle consisted of (i) the disputed information (ii) an unredacted version of correspondence between the Commissioner and HMT (iii) a confidential annex to the Decision Notice.
The tribunal considered that it was not necessary for some of the information originally in the closed bundle to remain closed. The tribunal’s deliberations were therefore adjourned and a case management order issued in relation to the closed bundle. A large portion of the previously closed information was provided to the appellant, and the Judge was satisfied that the remainder of the documents had to remain closed, otherwise the purpose of the proceedings would be defeated. The appellant and the Commissioner were given the opportunity to make further submissions on the basis of the newly open information but none were received.
- Heading
- Introduction
- Factual background to the appeal
- Request, decision notice and appeal
- The response
- The Decision Notice
- Notice of Appeal
- Ground 1
- Ground 2
- The Commissioner’s response
- HMT’s response
- Ground 1
- Ground 2
- Reply of the appellant
- Distinction between data subjects
- Personal data of Rishi Sunak
- Personal data of other data subjects
- The international relations exemption
- Additional submissions from HMT
- Evidence
- Legal framework
- Section 27(1) International relations
- The role of the tribunal
- Issues
- Conclusions