![[2025] UKUT 076 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
As regards the lateness of the withdrawal and the absence of an explanation for that lateness
As regards the lateness of the withdrawal and the absence of an explanation for that lateness:-
◦ the 2009 Rules themselves anticipate late withdrawals with rule 17 (1)(b) providing that it is open to the appellant to withdraw “orally at a hearing.”
◦ by this Chamber’s Rules there is no obligation on [the Met Police] to explain why it wishes to withdraw
◦ parties to appeals should continue to seek to work to narrow issues and reach agreement where that is possible
Neither the timing of the decision to withdraw nor the concern raised about the explanation for the timing would be reasons to refuse consent to the withdrawal of this appeal.
Mr Greenwood also takes the view that [the Met Police] have not performed its obligations pursuant to the Decision Notice adequately.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeal. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal made on16 January 2024under case numberEA/2023/0340was made in error of law and is set aside
- Introduction
- Relevant factual background
- The FTT’s Consent to Withdraw Decision
- “DECISION
- this document is formal notification of the taking effect of the withdrawal further to rule 17(5) 2009 Rules… Decision on withdrawal
- As regards the lateness of the withdrawal and the absence of an explanation for that lateness
- Relevant law Section 1 of FOIA provides, subject to immaterial exceptions on this appeal, the core duty under FOIA. It states
- Section 50 of FOIA is about complaints to the Information Commissioner and sets out (insofar as is relevant)
- The parties’ arguments
- Conclusions