![[2025] UKUT 066 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
The appeal is allowed in part
The appeal is allowed in part.
The decision of the First-tier Tribunal involved the making of an error in point of law in relation to one piece of information, notification of contravention letters served against Amark.
Under section 12(2)(a) and (b)(i) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 I set the First-tier Tribunal’s decision aside as respects the matter in which it erred and remit the case to the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) to reconsider in accordance with the following directions.
Directions
This case is remitted to a freshly constituted panel of the First-tier Tribunal for reconsideration at an oral hearing.
The matter to be considered is Mrs O’Hanlon’s appeal, so far as it relates to the notification of contravention letters served against Amark. In considering this matter, the First-tier Tribunal shall reflect, so far as relevant, the reasoning and conclusions in this decision of the Upper Tribunal, and in particular shall proceed on the basis that
the notification of contravention letters served against Amark were information within the scope of Mrs O’Hanlon’s information request,
Mrs O’Hanlon’s information request was received on 27 April 2020,
HSE did not hold the notification of contravention letters served against Amark when the request was received, but
subsequently, on 15 May 2020 and 26 August 2020, HSE came to hold the notification of contravention letters served against Amark; and
HSE made a “reconsideration” decision in August 2021 by which it refused disclosure of the notification of contravention letters served against Amark.
The First-tier Tribunal will determine the appeal, so far as it relates to the notification of contravention letters served against Amark, in accordance with section 58 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, as read with regulation 18 of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.
The First-tier Tribunal shall otherwise approach the remitted case (and any evidence it hears in respect of it) afresh. It is not bound by the reasoning, evaluation of evidence or conclusions of the First-tier Tribunal whose decision has been set aside in respect of the remitted matter.
The First-tier Tribunal shall, as soon as reasonably possible, make directions enabling the parties to adduce evidence, and make written submissions, in relation to the remitted case, in a fair, just, orderly and efficient manner.
A copy of this decision shall be added to the bundle to be placed before the panel of the First-tier Tribunal hearing the remitted appeal.
These directions may be supplemented by later directions by a tribunal judge, registrar or caseworker in the General Regulatory Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal.
REASONS FOR DECISION
- 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