header-logo header-logo

26 March 2014
Issue: 7600 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Times loss

Journalist loses appeal in Supreme Court over Freedom of Information request

A journalist for The Times has lost his Supreme Court case to force the Charity Commission to release documents relating to an inquiry into George Galloway MP’s Mariam Appeal charity. 

The Mariam Appeal was launched by Galloway in 1998 following the imposition of sanctions against Iraq. The Commission’s inquiry took place in 2003-2004.

Kennedy v Charity Commission [2014] UKSC 20 concerned the question of whether the fact documents held by a public authority pursuant to an inquiry are statutorily exempt from Freedom of Information Act requests for 30 years after the inquiry, is a breach of Art 10(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Justices dismissed Kennedy’s appeal, since an absolute exemption from disclosure existed as a matter of ordinary statutory construction.

David White, solicitor, IP and commercial, Rollits, says: “Interestingly, both Lord Wilson and Lord Carnwath stated that Mr Kennedy had a right to receive the requested information pursuant to his right to freedom of expression under Art 10 of the ECHR. 

“Furthermore, they held that the absolute exemption granted by s 32(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 should be read so that it expires at the end of the relevant inquiry rather than expiring 30 years following the completion of the inquiry. In my view, if the position of Lords Wilson and Carnwarth were upheld, public inquiries would be subject to earlier scrutiny and comment leading, potentially, to greater openness and transparency on public authorities.  

“This surely reflects the overall intention behind freedom of information. If this had been the prevailing view, however, it could have had a chilling effect on the effective conduct of inquiries. It could have caused a reluctance by third parties to be forthcoming in the provision of full information to a public authority conducting an inquiry, the irony being that such a chilling effect has the potential to reduce the very transparency FOIA seeks to uphold.”

Issue: 7600 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—Nathan Evans

Birketts—Nathan Evans

Commercial and technology team in Cambridge strengthened by partner hire

Andrew & Andrew Solicitors—Shikha Datta

Andrew & Andrew Solicitors—Shikha Datta

Hampshire firm appoints head of new family department

Latham & Watkins—Sarah Lightdale

Latham & Watkins—Sarah Lightdale

Firm strengthens securities practice with partner return

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll