Enforcing jurisdiction
United Kingdom · Geography does not establish applicable law.
Confirmed applicable legislation
No confirmed legal basis recorded.

Information Comissioner – Court Ruling (United Kingdom, 2023)

Court Ruling
DPA First-tierTribunal25 September 2023United Kingdom
final
Court Ruling

Privacy enforcement record

This record is classified outside cookie consent. Subject classification does not confirm an applicable law. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.

A UK tribunal ruled that Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council was correct to deny a request for information about an employee involved in a cycle route project. The council argued that disclosing the employee's name would violate data protection rules. This decision reinforces the importance of protecting personal information even in public records.

What happened

The tribunal upheld the council's decision to reject a Freedom of Information request for an employee's name due to data protection concerns.

Who was affected

The individual who made the information request was affected by the tribunal's ruling.

What the authority found

The tribunal decided that the council's refusal was justified under data protection laws, as disclosing the name would constitute processing personal data without consent.

Why this matters

This ruling highlights the balance between transparency and privacy, reminding public bodies to carefully consider data protection when handling information requests.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
Art. 5(1)(a) GDPR
View original scraped data
Art. 5(1)(a) GDPR

Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.

National Law Articles
AI-identified
Freedom of Information Act
Decision AuthorityFirst-tier Tribunal

Source checks

Linked-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 20 March 2026.

Processing notes: articles corrected, national law identified, authority corrected.

Retrieved text may be a secondary summary or an announcement. These automated statuses do not establish that the original decision was read or that the record received an independent legal review. How we check sources

Full Legal Summary
Detailed

An individual (“appellant”) made a request to their local council (Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council - “controller”) under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“FOIA”) seeking information on the individual who was responsible for drawing a proposed cycle route. The controller rejected the request for information pursuant to section 40(2) FOIA, stating that the disclosure of information would contravene one of the data protection principles as the employee had not consented to the disclosure and the data would not have been processed in a fair and lawful way pursuant to Article 5(1)(a) GDPR. The appellant sought to argue that the name of the individual who created the public drawing was not considered personal data per Article 4(1) GDPR. The Tribunal held that the controller was correct to rely on the exemption provided in section 40(2) FOIA. Per the Tribunal, a disclosure of personal data following a FOIA request for information would be transmission, dissemination or otherwise making it available and is therefore processing for the purposes of Article 4(2) GDPR. Responses to requests for information under FOIA are published and, as such, are available for the whole world to view; they would not be exclusive to the appellant. To be lawful in accordance with Article 5(1) GDPR, publication must be necessary in the pursuit of the legitimate interest. In Goldsmith International Business School -v- The Information Commissioner and the Home Office [2014] UKUT 563 (ACC); (a) “necessary” means being more than desirable but less than indispensable or absolute necessity and can be summarised as “reasonably necessary”, (b) the test for necessity must be satisfied before consideration of whether the interests or fundamental rights or freedoms of the data subject should override the necessary disclosure and (c) the test of reasonable necessity itself involves the consideration of alternative measures and so a measure would not be necessary if the legitimate aim could

Outcome

Court Ruling

A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Information Comissioner in UK

This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.

Details

Ruling Date

25 September 2023

Authority

DPA First-tierTribunal

About this data

Data: GDPRhub (noyb.eu)
Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Automatically normalized and classified

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Information Comissioner - United Kingdom (2023). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: