Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber

[2023] UKUT 157 (AAC)

Fecha: 05-Jul-2023

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

References in what follows to

“sections” or “s” are to sections of the Freedom of Information Act 2000

the “FTT” are to the First-tier Tribunal

the “FTT decision” are to the FTT decision under reference EA/2020/0310, issued on 22 February 2022, and dismissing the appeal under s57 of the Appellant (“Mr Coombs”) against a decision notice (the “decision notice”) of the First Respondent dated 22 September 2020

numbers in square brackets are to paragraphs of the FTT decision

“TBGS” are to the Second Respondent.

This is an appeal against the FTT decision, which found that the decision notice was in accordance with the law. The FTT decision followed a hearing on 8 February 2022. Mr Coombs represented himself throughout the FTT proceedings. The First Respondent was not represented at the hearing. TBGS was represented before the FTT by Ms McMahon of counsel. Part of the hearing before the FTT was in “closed session”; when the open session resumed, counsel for TBGS provided Mr Coombs with “a comprehensive and accurate summary of the matters covered” (per [76]). The FTT decision itself was entirely “open”.

The decision notice related to certain information requested by Mr Coombs from TBGS on 13 October 2019, namely

a copy of the “detailed statistical analysis” referred to in a letter dated 1 October 2019 from TBGS to parents and carers of children who had taken an 11+ test under the auspices of TBGS in which significant errors had been discovered (this was item 1 in the request); and

the following “specific information” if not included in the report above (and following the numbering of items in the decision notice):

the number and nature of the ‘subtests’ making up the overall assessment (e.g. verbal skills, comprehension, maths/numeracy and non-verbal reasoning)

for each subtest, the number of questions set and reliability when the tests are set and administered without any errors.

specific to the recent errors, for each subtest

the number of questions removed from the assessment and

the revised reliability.

The background to this request was, as set out at [3], that there had been errors in the “secondary transfer test” set by TBGS and sat by children on 12 September 2019; and on 1 October 2019, GL Assessment Limited (“GLAL”), a third party engaged by TBGS to produce and mark the test, and TBGS had written to parents of children who sat the test, explaining what steps had been taken in the marking of the test to account for the errors.

TBGS did not provide items 1, 2, 3 and 4b of Mr Coombs’ information request (it disclosed the information at item 4a), citing the exemptions in sections 41 (information provided in confidence) and 43 (commercial interests).

The decision notice concluded that TBGS correctly applied s41 and 43(2) to the information it withheld; and that TBGS did not hold the information it confirmed was not held under s1(1)(a).