Local government is an exciting place. And because it is an exciting place, filled with thrusting go-getting types who live on the edge of danger, there is the risk of occasional accusations of wrongdoing. Councillor Hussain, a Labour member, of that parish is the subject of serious allegations – which have not yet been determined – to whit that he procured the sale of some toilets to a person connected to him at an undervalue and that he expunged some parking tickets issued to family members. Continue reading →

A mere three years ago, the FTT held that the Ministerial Diary of Andrew Lansley was relevantly held under FOIA and was not exempt under section 35(1)(b). Now the Court of Appeal has held, in Department of Health v Information Commissioner & Lewis [2017] EWCA Civ 374, that the FTT made no error. The fact that no-one can now remember who Andrew Lansley was (now Lord Lansley CBE thank you) or why anyone would care, is by-the-by. Continue reading →

It came as news to us at Panopticon, but apparently there is an election happening. We hadn’t seen anything about it, but obviously our vision, like the election, was not 2020 after all. But not wanting to miss out on the fun (and by fun, we mean limitless repetition of meaningless slogans, the never-ending abuse of BBC reporters for ‘bias’ by everyone, and a slow dawning sense of the end of days not coming soon enough), we thought a quick glance at the main party manifestos would be in order. Continue reading →

In amongst the unsolicited love letters, the pictures of rudely shaped vegetables and simple abuse from those who believe a section 14 FOIA response is a deliberate conspiracy against them, the Panopticon postbag occasionally receives a polite enquiry about why we have not passed comment upon some fascinating information law development. Such a point might be made about Case C-398/15 Camera di Commercio v Manni (ECLI:EU:C:2017:197), in which the CJEU addressed, for only the second time, the ‘right to be forgotten’. Of course, in this case, we have analysed it at great length, but all well-known search engines have delisted it so thoroughly that everyone has forgotten where to find it. So here, like a vexatious requestor or a particularly unpleasant kebab, we are again. Continue reading →

Back in late January, some fellow whom posterity will not recall wrote a blog about the Opinion of AG Bobek in Case C-13/16 Rigas. This Opinion was notable chiefly because it said things which were obviously unlikely to have come from the European Court, things like using “common sense” to guide the interpretation and operation of Directive 95/46/EC. Some suspected it might be a fake. What, asked Panopticon, would the CJEU make of such free-wheeling mania? The wait is over. Continue reading →

Who is Karen Bradley? No points if you said it was that shiny West Ham lady who sits next to Lord Sugar on the Apprentice, managing to look considerably more impressive than Surrralan even though she has spent a large part of her career propping up some pornographers. No, she is the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. More importantly, she is also the data protection Easter Bunny. Continue reading →