Case No. UKUT-60-(AAC)

10.On 12 October 2018 the Appellant wrote to the Crown Prosecution Service (the CPS) and requested information in the following terms:“This FOIA request is for the legal grounds - redacting any personal or sensitive personal data - contained within any Treasury Counsel's Opinion on the discontinuance of the trial of Paul Burrell at the Central Criminal Court in 2002.”11.On 2 November 2018 the CPS contacted the Appellant and asked him to clarify whether he was asking for Treasury Counsel’s opinion or advice regarding the discontinuance. The complainant responded on the same day, providing the following clarification:“The narrow issue of interest in this FOIA request - and this may be reflected in both Treasury Counsel's Opinion as well as the advice given on discontinuance - is the law relating to the competence and, as a separate matter, the compellability of the Sovereign (in this case The Queen) to give evidence at the trial. The leading case on this issue - which may or may not have been considered in the Opinion and/or advice on discontinuance, is R v Mylius (1911). This issue, which arose during the course of the case, may not have been part of Treasury Counsel's original opinion. It is likely, however to have been part of the advice given on discontinuance.”12.The CPS provided its full response on 12 November 2018. It explained that it was withholding the information, citing the exemption under section 42(1) of FOIA (for LPP).13.Following an internal review, the CPS wrote to the Appellant on 20 November 2018, upholding it original decision.