FT/EJ/2024/0007 - [2025] UKFTT 01318 (GRC)

The Applicant’s request was as follows:

“Please can you provide the following in relation to Governing Board Meetings from

01/01/2020 to 21/04/2023. Including:

(a)

the agenda for every meeting;

(b)

the attendees;

(c)

the signed minutes of every such meeting; and

(d)

any report or other paper considered at any such meeting.”

The Substituted Decision Notice made in the first Tribunal decision is as set out at paragraph 4 above and was sent to the parties on 12 March 2024. It was sent to Rebecca Cosgrove by email on the same date. The first Tribunal decision includes the following in relation to anonymity:

The Respondent sent the Applicant a set of documents by post, received on 30 March 2024. The Applicant says this was a set of only 29 documents (although an email at the time says 33), there were no attachments or papers, and they had been printed in a way that meant information was missing. The Applicant raised issues about missing information with the Tribunal on the same date. She did not contact the Respondent because it was not a party to the proceedings at that stage, and the Applicant did not want to breach the anonymity order. There was some confusion about whether issues of non-compliance with the Substituted Decision Notice in the first Tribunal Decision was a matter for the Tribunal or for the Information Commissioner. The Applicant made the Application to the Tribunal on 7 May 2024.

Mr Nelson was asked during his evidence about why a limited set of documents was provided to the Applicant on 30 March 2024. The Applicant made the point that, in previous correspondence to the Information Commissioner, the Respondent had said there were more than 200 documents within scope of the request, and it would take a long time to provide the information. Mr Nelson was not involved at this point and did not know why this happened.

Judge Heald made case management directions on 29 May 2024. These directions included the order, “unless and until the Tribunal, the Upper Tribunal, or a Court orders otherwise the Appellant and/or any member of their family, is granted anonymity.” The directions were sent to Ms Cosgrove at the Respondent by email together with a redacted version of the Application.

On 20 June 2024 there was the telephone call from Mr Nelson to the Applicant’s spouse on behalf of 5 Dimensions Trust. Mr Nelson gave evidence that the Headteacher of the School was, in his professional opinion, “absolutely overwhelmed” by this and various other matters, and was struggling with capacity to respond fully to the Applicant’s information request. He emphasised a number of times in his evidence that both the Headteacher and the School were overwhelmed at the relevant time. Mr Nelson met with the Headteacher and offered to support with a response to the Applicant’s information request, including contacting the Applicant to try and find a resolution. This led to the telephone call. Only two other individuals at 5 Dimensions Trust knew about this. One of them was the governance professional, who was also the PA to the Headteacher at the Applicant’s son’s new school. She emailed the Applicant as part of her role at 5 Dimensions Trust. Mr Nelson confirmed he was not told about the anonymity order by the Headteacher or anyone else involved with the School before he called the Applicant’s spouse.

Mr Nelson explained that 5 Dimensions Trust was then unable to provide further support to the School in respect of answering the Applicant’s information request because of the anonymity order. He said it would be very challenging or impossible to do this without knowing the Applicant’s name, and we accept this.

On 4 July 2024 the Applicant was sent a USB stick by the Respondent which contained a substantial number of additional documents. The Applicant says this contained around 90% of what had been requested. As part of these proceedings the Applicant then gave details of 14 missing items of information within the scope of the Applicant’s information request.

On 2 December 2024, the School became part of 5 Dimensions Trust. As set out above, a response on the 14 missing items was provided by Mr Nelson with his witness statement on 6 December 2024. A number of additional documents were disclosed. Mr Nelson gave evidence that these had been retrieved after an additional search. This included contacting the local authority and conducting searches of the Governor Hub secure system, which has folders in restricted areas, as well as searches of the School’s IT system and emails.

The Applicant maintains that one document has still not been disclosed – the Headteachers Report for Teaching & Learning Committee on 6 March 2023. The Applicant says this is referred to in the relevant minutes and so must exist. Mr Nelson’s evidence was that this had been searched for and could not be located anywhere. They had found no evidence it existed. He said that, although not best practice, it may have been a verbal report.

On 17 January 2025 the Respondent’s solicitors responded to various points raised by the Applicant in response to Mr Nelson’s first witness statement, and disclosed two additional sets of documents (Governance Development Plan, and various data reports shared ahead of the meeting on 6 March 2023).