FT/EA/2024/0299 - [2025] UKFTT 01138 (GRC)

The public interest outweighs the risks, which are minor and not “national”.

AWL is the only company of about a dozen approached to plead the exception. The others have responded to similar requests.

The Commissioner has misrepresented the Request. The Appellant did not request accurate location information and respects the 1km2 advice issued by DEFRA.

The large-scale map is so small as to be useless. The four-digit grid reference is more precise than requested, but the list is substantially incomplete and did not include permit/licence numbers.

In concluding that AWL was entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(a), the Commissioner did not take into account that the Appellant had not requested precise locations.

AWL has already published information on-line e.g. draught plans, without the suggested precautions in place.

It is wishful thinking to suppose that boreholes, of which there are thousands, are “critical” infrastructure. Anyone wishing to attack it would easily find much more inviting targets which often advertise their location.

AWL has produced no evidence of increased risk. None of the other companies approached perceived any risk.

The Appellant submits that his work will not increase the risk. Anyone likely to have any interest are already aware of the locations. The Appellant maintains that he has not asked for any information that would adversely affect national security/public safety. “Exact” locations have not been requested.

AWL has not argued that the information is already “out there”. The risk is very low and, in the Appellant’s view, would not be increased.

The Appellant disagrees the public interest favours maintaining the exception.