![[2023] UKUT 245 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Ground 4
Ground 4
Ground 4 argues that the First-tier Tribunal erred in its approach to the issue whether the public interest in exposing iniquity justified disclosure, failing to apply the proper test set out in AG v Guardian Newspapers [1990] 1 AC 109 at §283.
Because I have decided that the Tribunal erred in law in the ways identified in Grounds 2 and 3, and because I have decided to set aside the FtT Decision and to remit the matter to be reheard by a panel of the First-tier Tribunal, it is not necessary for me to deal with Ground 4. The panel of the First-tier Tribunal which hears the remitted appeal will need to decide whether the criteria set out in section 41 FOIA are satisfied in respect of the withheld material, and this includes whether disclosure would involve an actionable breach of confidence. That exercise will involve fresh consideration being given to the issue of the public interest in disclosure.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal
- This case is about the Freedom of Information Act 2000 ( “FOIA” ), which provides for a general right to disclosure of information held by public authorities, subject to certain exemptions It raises the legal issue of whether, when faced with a docum
- Factual background Homes for Haringey ( “HfH” ) was set up by Haringey Council (the “Council” ) in 2006 to manage its housing stock comprising approximately 21,000 leasehold properties, some of which were rented, and ot
- HLA was established in 2000 to provide representation to 4,500 leaseholders of Haringey Council. HLA has from time to time been ‘recognised’ by HfH as a consultative body for leaseholders, a status th
- The requests
- Procedural background
- Grounds of appeal
- The positions of the parties
- The Information Commissioner (First Respondent)
- Homes for Haringey (Second Respondent)
- The law
- Discussion
- Ground 2
- Ground 4
- Ground 7
- Conclusions