[2025] UKUT 319 (AAC)

The FTT was wrong in failing to consider whether the ICO had jurisdiction in relation to Clearview’s activities during the UK Test Phase.

In its Response to the ICO’s appeal to the Upper Tribunal, Clearview advanced four grounds upon which it invited the Upper Tribunal to uphold the FTT’s decision (to allow Clearview’s appeal) for reasons additional to those provided by the FTT. Three of those grounds had been argued before the FTT but were rejected by it. One of them had been argued before the FTT but was not addressed in the FTT’s decision. These grounds were described as Clearview’s “Additional Reasons”. They all relate to the FTT’s decision that Clearview fell within the territorial scope of the GDPRs. Clearview argued that for the reasons it gave, and the additional reasons set out below, the FTT was right to find that the Notices exceeded the ICO’s jurisdiction. Clearview’s Additional Reasons may be summarised as follows.