header-logo header-logo

No limits?

03 May 2012 / Jamie Potter
Issue: 7512 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Jamie Potter questions the “absolute” exemptions to disclosure under FIA 2000

In Kennedy v Charity Commission EA/2008/0083, the First-tier Tribunal (Information Rights) gave detailed consideration to whether the absolute exemptions to disclosure contained in the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FIA 2000) interfered with the right to freedom of communication as protected by the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998). In their report on the issue to the Court of Appeal, the First-tier Tribunal found that, in certain circumstances, a public authority’s refusal to disclose information could amount to such an interference, and, as a result, absolute exemptions may not be as absolute as they appear.

However, before the matter could be considered by the Court of Appeal ([2012] EWCA Civ 317), a similar issue arose in a separate case before the Supreme Court, BBC v Sugar (No. 2) [2012] UKSC 4; [2012] All ER (D) 108 (Feb), with three of the five justices of the Supreme Court explicitly addressing the issue, and concluding that no such interference would arise.

Background to Kennedy

In

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll