![[2024] UKUT 290 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
Why there was no oral hearing of this appeal
Why there was no oral hearing of this appeal
The Information Commissioner did not request an oral hearing. Mr Puchooa did request an oral hearing, and I took his preference into account. However, while I have no doubt that Mr Puchooa has much that he would like to say, I think an oral hearing of the appeal is unlikely to result in a significant improvement in my understanding of Mr Puchooa’s case to the extent relevant to whether the First-tier Tribunal had erred in law and its decision should be set aside. The overriding objective is best served by this appeal being determined on the papers to avoid further delay.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal
- The background to this appeal is that Mr Puchooa has, since at least mid-2018, been concerned about anti-social behaviour ( “ASB” ) in the street where he lives. He entered into correspondence with va
- On 20 June 2022, in exercise of his rights under section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 ( “FOIA” ), Mr Puchooa made a request to his local authority for certain information concerning the in
- On 5 May 2023 the Information Commissioner issued Decision Notice IC-199663-K9B6 (the “Decision Notice” ). In the Decision Notice the Information Commissioner accepted the local authority’s evidence t
- The permission stage
- The parties’ positions
- Why there was no oral hearing of this appeal
- Why I have allowed this appeal
- Conclusions