Case Reference: EA-2023-0524
Information Rights
Decided without a hearing
Before
TRIBUNAL JUDGE BUCKLEY
Between
SHELLEY JARVIS
Appellant
and
THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
Respondent
JUDGE BUCKLEY
DECISION
The appeal is struck out.
REASONS
By order dated 21 February 2024, sent to the parties on 23 February 2024, the appellant was informed that the tribunal was considering striking out the appeal on the grounds that it had no jurisdiction in relation to the proceedings. The appellant was given the opportunity to make representations as to why the appeal should not be struck out. Although the appellant emailed the tribunal on 27 February 2024, she did not provide any representations.
As I set out in the reasons for that order the appeal is a challenge to decision reference IC-247478-P0M9 which is a letter from the Commissioner’s criminal investigations team (CRIT) to Brendan Morgan informing him that CRIT had considered his allegations and did not consider that there was any evidence of an offence being committed under section 77 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
The tribunal does not have jurisdiction in relation to these proceedings for two reasons:
The tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider appeals in relation to section 77.
The appellant is not the complainant to whom the decision was issued.
Given those reasons it is not appropriate to exercise the tribunal’s power under rule 5(3)(k)(i) to transfer the proceedings to another court or tribunal.
On that basis the appeal is struck out under rule 8(2)(a) because the tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear the appeal.
Signed Date:
Sophie Buckley 8 July 2024