![[2025] UKUT 066 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
References in what follows to
References in what follows to
“sections” or “s” are to sections of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“FOIA”)
“regulations” are to the Environmental Information Regulations 2004
the “FTT” are to the First-tier Tribunal
“HSE” are to the second respondent
“IC” are to the first respondent.
- Heading
- The appeal is allowed in part
- References in what follows to
- References to numbers in square brackets are (unless the context indicates otherwise) to paragraphs of the FTT’s decision The decision of the FTT
- set out a chronology, as follows
- At [2], the FTT stated that the appeal concerned Mrs O’Hanlon’s contention that
- The grant of permission to appeal
- Responses to the grant of permission
- The Upper Tribunal’s analysis
- Why the FTT erred in finding that HSE held no other information within scope of Mrs O’Hanlon’s request
- Whether the FTT’s error was material
- Email of 24 March 2020 from A Ltd to HSE
- Email from A Ltd to HSE of 17 March 2020
- Prohibition notice served on the site developer on 6 April 2020
- Notification of contravention letters served against Amark
- Conclusions