Matthew Burn vs The Information Commissioner – First-tier Tribunal – [2024] UKFTT 1143 (GRC) – Case Summary

Introduction

The First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) recently delivered an interim decision in the case of Matthew Burn vs The Information Commissioner, concerning the Meridian Water Masterplan. The Tribunal found that the London Borough of Enfield holds further information within the scope of the request made by Matthew Burn on 16 May 2023, contrary to the Information Commissioner's previous decision.

Background

The case arose from a large-scale regeneration and development programme known as 'Meridian Water', led by the London Borough of Enfield. The appellant, Matthew Burn, sought the latest version of the Meridian Water Masterplan, which he believed had been completed. The Council initially withheld information, citing commercial sensitivity, and the Information Commissioner upheld this decision.

The Tribunal's Findings

The Tribunal, chaired by Judge Sophie Buckley, found that the Council should have processed the request under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004. It determined that the Council held further information within the scope of the request, including documents related to financial forecasting and spatial masterplan information.

Scope of the Request

The Tribunal clarified that the request encompassed the latest version of any documents related to the Meridian Water Masterplan, whether or not they were complete, agreed, or adopted. This included various iterations and drafts of the masterplan, as well as associated documents referred to in internal communications.

Implications for Enfield Council

The Tribunal's decision requires Enfield Council to conduct a new search for documents within the scope of the request as defined by the Tribunal. The Council must then consider whether to rely on any exemptions before disclosing the information to the appellant.

Next Steps

The Tribunal's interim decision allows for further submissions and evidence from the parties, with the potential for a substituted decision notice. The Council's previous interpretation of the request was deemed too narrow, necessitating a broader search for relevant documents.

Conclusion

This case highlights the complexities involved in large-scale development plans and the importance of transparency and compliance with information regulations. The Tribunal's decision underscores the need for public authorities to thoroughly assess the scope of information requests and ensure comprehensive disclosure.

Learn More

For more information on data protection, see BeCivil's guide to English Data Protection Law.