The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to dismiss the appeal. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal under reference EA/2022/0228, issued on 1 February 2023, did not involve the making of an error on
The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to dismiss the appeal. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal under reference EA/2022/0228, issued on 1 February 2023, did not involve the making of an error on a point of law.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
Preliminaries
References in what follows to
“sections” or “s” are to sections of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“FOIA”) (unless otherwise indicated)
the “FTT” are to the First-tier Tribunal
the “FTT decision” are to the FTT decision under reference EA/2022/0228, issued on 1 February 2023, and dismissing the appeal under s57 of the Appellant (“PLP”) against a decision notice (the “ICdecision notice”) of the Respondent (“IC”) dated 26 July 2022
numbers in square brackets are to paragraphs of the FTT decision.
This is an appeal against the FTT decision, which found that the IC decision notice was in accordance with the law.
I am grateful to counsel for their written and oral arguments. In what follows, I have not recited or summarised their submissions as such, although I have, where I have not accepted a material submission made, endeavoured to summarise it and explain why I did not accept it.
Part of Upper Tribunal hearing was “closed”, during which I was shown the non-disclosed “criteria” (it will become evident in reading this decision what “criteria” I am here referring to).
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to dismiss the appeal. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal under reference EA/2022/0228, issued on 1 February 2023, did not involve the making of an error on
- The information request that led to the IC decision notice and its context
- HO’s response to the information request
- The IC decision notice
- The exemption in s31 ( Law enforcement )
- The FTT hearing and the conclusions in the FTT decision
- Decision on likelihood of prejudice
- Conclusions on PIBT
- Conclusions on PLP’s “further information” request
- Grounds of appeal
- Upper Tribunal’s analysis
- Erred in relying on ‘insufficient’ evidence?
- Erred in not taking PLP’s evidence into account?
- Inadequate reasons?
- Grounds related to PIBT
- Ground b.ii
- Ground b.iii
- Ground c.: PLP’s “further information” request
- Conclusions
![[2024] UKUT 71 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)