Judicial Appointments Commission

The complainant made a multi-part request focussing on the costs relating to certain information rights First-tier Tribunals and any associated appeals, together with other requested information. The Judicial Appointments Commission (the ‘JAC’) said it did not hold some of the requested information, it provided some costs details with additional explanations and disclosed some information with redactions under section 40(2) (personal information) and section 42 (legal professional privilege) of FOIA. Ultimately, the complainant remained concerned only with the withholding of a monetary figure associated with a named individual under section 40(2) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the JAC was entitled to rely on section 40(2) of FOIA in relation to the withheld monetary figure, for the reasons set out in this notice. However, by failing to provide both its substantive response and refusal notice where exemptions were cited, within the statutory 20 working days’ time limit, the JAC has breached sections 10 and 17 of FOIA. The Commissioner also finds a breach of section 1 of FOIA as the JAC failed to confirm whether or not it held the requested information within the same timeframe. No steps are required as a result of this decision.