![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |||||||||
First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) |
||||||||||
PLEASE SUPPORT BAILII & FREE ACCESS TO LAW
To maintain its current level of service, BAILII urgently needs the support of its users.
Since you use the site, please consider making a donation to celebrate BAILII's 25 years of providing free access to law. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing this vital service.
Thank you for your support! | ||||||||||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) >> Miles v Information Commissioner [2023] UKFTT 955 (GRC) (10 November 2023) URL: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/GRC/2023/955.html Cite as: [2023] UKFTT 955 (GRC) |
[New search]
[Context]
[View without highlighting]
[Printable PDF version]
[Help]
(General Regulatory Chamber)
Information Rights
Section 166 Data Protection Act 2018
On 20 October 2023 |
||
B e f o r e :
____________________
DAVID MILES |
Applicant |
|
- and - |
||
THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER |
Respondent |
____________________
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Background
Strike out
(3) The Tribunal may strike out the whole or a part of the proceedings if-
(c) the Tribunal considers there is no reasonable prospect of the appellant's case, or part of it, succeeding.
41…..The Tribunal must consider whether there is a realistic, as opposed to a fanciful (in the sense of it being entirely without substance) prospect of succeeding on the issue at a full hearing…..A 'realistic' prospect of success is one that carries some degree of conviction and not one that is merely arguable…..The tribunal must avoid conducting a 'mini-trial'.
8. More recent rulings from the superior courts point to the need to look at the interests of justice as a whole ….It is, moreover, plainly a decision which involves a balancing exercise and the exercise of a judicial discretion, taking into account in particular the requirements of rule 2 of the GRC Rules.
Section 166 DPA
(1) This section applies where, after a data subject makes a complaint under section 165 or Article 77 of the GDPR, the Commissioner-
(a) fails to take appropriate steps to respond to the complaint,
(b) fails to provide the complainant with information about progress on the complaint, or of the outcome of the complaint, before the end of the period of 3 months beginning when the Commissioner received the complaint, or
(c) if the Commissioner's consideration of the complaint is not concluded during that period, fails to provide the complainant with such information during a subsequent period of 3 months.
(2) The Tribunal may, on an application by the data subject, make an order requiring the Commissioner-
(a) to take appropriate steps to respond to the complaint, or
(b) to inform the complainant of progress on the complaint, or of the outcome of the complaint, within a period specified in the order.
(3) An order under subsection (2)(a) may require the Commissioner
(a) to take steps specified in the order.
(b) to conclude an investigation, or take a specified step, within a period specified in the order.
(4) Section 165(5) applies for the purposes of subsections (1)(a) and (2)(a) as it applies for the purposes of section 165(4)(a).
(4) If the Commissioner receives a complaint under subsection (2), the Commissioner must
(a) take appropriate steps to respond to the complaint,
(b) inform the complainant of the outcome of the complaint,
(c) inform the complainant of the rights under section 166, and
(d) if asked to do so by the complainant, provide the complainant with further information about how to pursue the complaint.
(5) The reference in subsection (4)(a) to taking appropriate steps in response to a complaint includes
(a) investigating the subject matter of the complaint, to the extent appropriate, and
(b) informing the complainant about progress on the complaint …….
The Commissioner's position
85. …..in considering appropriateness, the Tribunal will be bound to take into consideration and give weight to the views of the Commissioner as an expert regulator.
Decision
Signed Simon Heald
Judge of the First-tier Tribunal
Date:20 October 2023