Cases

The Appellant made a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for information about advertising and sponsorship revenue received by Channel 4 from Sainsbury’s. The Information Commissioner upheld Channel Four’s refusal to provide the information on the basis that it was held for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and therefore not held in Channel Four’s capacity as a public authority under the Act (i.e. that the so-called “derogation” applied). On appeal, the Appellant argued that he was seeking only aggregated information, not the “building blocks” consisting of specific figures for specific programme sponsorships etc, and that there was insufficient connection between that aggregated information and the purposes of journalism etc to engage the derogation. The First-tier Tribunal disagreed, holding that it was necessary to consider whether the “building blocks” were pieces of information held for the purposes of journalism etc. Having heard detailed evidence about how modern TV advertising works, the Tribunal accepted Channel Four’s case and upheld the Information Commissioner’s Decision Notice.

Data protection – harm – de minimis - summary judgment

Prince Charles letters - Freedom of Information Act 2000 – Environmental Information Regulations 2004 – Constitutional Law – Executive Veto – EU Charter of Fundamental Rights