FOI litigation and judicial review
Freedom of Information (FOI) Litigation and Judicial Review
1. Overview of FOI and Judicial Review
Freedom of Information laws provide the public the right to access information held by public authorities, promoting transparency and accountability in government. When a request for information is refused or inadequately handled, applicants can challenge the decision through FOI litigation or judicial review.
FOI litigation specifically challenges decisions made under FOI laws.
Judicial review is a broader remedy that scrutinizes the legality, reasonableness, and fairness of administrative decisions, including FOI refusals.
Judicial review in FOI cases examines:
Whether the public authority followed the law (legality).
Whether the decision was reasonable or irrational.
Whether procedural fairness was observed.
2. Key Issues in FOI Litigation and Judicial Review
Scope of the information requested: Is it covered under the FOI law?
Exemptions: Does the information fall under any exemption (e.g., national security, privacy, commercial confidentiality)?
Public interest test: Is disclosure in the public interest, overriding exemptions?
Procedural fairness: Was the decision-making process fair and lawful?
Timeliness and adequacy of the response.
3. Important Case Laws in FOI Litigation and Judicial Review
Case 1: R (Evans) v Attorney General (2015) UK Supreme Court
Facts: Journalist Rob Evans requested Prince Charles’ letters to government ministers under FOI. The government initially refused citing exemption but later the Information Commissioner ordered disclosure. The government then issued a ministerial veto under the FOI Act to block release.
Issue: Whether the ministerial veto to block disclosure was lawful.
Judgment: The Supreme Court ruled the ministerial veto unlawful, emphasizing the importance of FOI principles and judicial oversight.
Significance: Affirmed the supremacy of FOI legislation and judicial review over executive attempts to block disclosure.
Case 2: Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (1990) – The Spycatcher Case
Facts: The UK government sought to prevent publication of a former MI5 agent’s memoirs under FOI principles.
Issue: The tension between government confidentiality and public’s right to know.
Judgment: Courts balanced FOI against confidentiality and national security, refusing to grant an injunction on publication.
Significance: Established that FOI rights may be limited by national security but require strong justification.
Case 3: Guardian Newspapers Ltd v Information Commissioner (2005)
Facts: Guardian Newspapers sought disclosure of letters between government and private companies.
Issue: Whether the requested information was exempt as commercially confidential.
Judgment: The Information Tribunal ordered disclosure, emphasizing that the public interest in transparency outweighed commercial confidentiality.
Significance: Clarified the application of the public interest test in FOI litigation.
Case 4: R (Miller) v Information Commissioner (2011)
Facts: Miller requested the full details of MPs’ expenses under FOI, which were initially withheld.
Issue: Whether the expenses information was exempt.
Judgment: The Upper Tribunal ruled in favor of disclosure.
Significance: Reinforced that FOI facilitates governmental accountability, especially regarding public funds.
Case 5: R (Friends of the Earth) v Information Commissioner (2010)
Facts: Friends of the Earth requested information on government’s environmental policies.
Issue: Whether the government could withhold information citing policy advice exemption.
Judgment: The court ordered disclosure, stating the public interest in environmental matters was paramount.
Significance: Strengthened the public interest argument in environmental transparency.
Case 6: Kennedy v Information Commissioner (2014)
Facts: Kennedy sought disclosure of communications between government and intelligence agencies.
Issue: Balancing privacy, national security, and FOI rights.
Judgment: The court upheld the exemption on national security grounds but ordered limited disclosure.
Significance: Demonstrated judicial balancing of competing FOI interests.
4. Summary
FOI litigation and judicial review are crucial for enforcing the right to information and holding governments accountable. Courts often balance transparency against exemptions such as national security or commercial confidentiality, applying rigorous public interest tests. These cases collectively illustrate the evolving jurisprudence safeguarding FOI rights while respecting legitimate restrictions.
RELATED Blog
0 comments