EA-2023-0405 - [2024] UKFTT 00700 (GRC)
Fecha: 30-Jul-2024
Ground 1
Ground 1
It is argued:
The Commissioner erred in applying a public interest balancing test rather than asking if the legitimate interests were overridden by the fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject.
The Commissioner wrongly placed excessive weight on whether the individuals would have a reasonable expectation that their information would not be disclosed.
The finding that Mr. Sunak’s green card was a personal matter was not compatible with the Commissioner’s finding that correspondence with US officials on the matter of his green card would inevitably relate to his impending official trip made in his public capacity. The Commissioner’s decision was inconsistent in relation to the legitimate interest.
The Commissioner erred in concluding that the legitimate interest had been served to a large extent by Lord Geidt’s report. This was not a relevant factor and the report did not contain or refer to the requested information.
- 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