ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived is not maintained. This Practice Note collates and summarises notable archived decisions and case law rulings relating to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FIA 2000). For the latest case law developments see: Freedom of information case tracker. The tables under each heading below highlight key decisions of the following: • Court of Appeal • Upper Tribunal (UT) • First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights) (FTT) • Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) For ease of reference, the tracker is divided into sections by reference to the key provisions and matters addressed under the FIA 2000, including: • information held by a public authority • requirements for a valid freedom of information request • fees and cost of compliance • time frame for compliance • means of communicating information • vexatious and repeated requests • information accessible to applicant by other means • information intended for future publication • national security • international relations • investigations and proceedings • law enforcement • court records • formulation of government policy • effective conduct of public affairs

Boilerplate provisions in public sector contracts This Practice Note looks at freedom of information clauses in public sector contracts. For more information on what contracting authorities (and other interested parties) need to know when using boilerplate provisions in public sector agreements, see Practice Note: Boilerplate provisions in public sector agreements: general considerations. Public procurement reform As of 24 February 2025, the main provisions of the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023) are in force. Procurements begun on or after this date must be carried out under PA 2023. The existing public procurement rules (including the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015) and Procurement Practice Notes (PPNs), Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016, Concession Contracts Regulations 2016, and Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011) and/or those governed by other statute(s) (such as health care procurements) continue to apply to procurements already commenced when the PA 2023 regime entered into force. Procurements starting after the entry into force of PA 2023 must be conducted by reference to PA 2023 only. Procurements commenced under the previous legislation

Public Law analysis: In Bence v Cornwall Council, the Upper Tribunal (UT) found Cornwall Council in contempt for failing to comply with a Substituted Decision Notice (SDN) issued by the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FIA 2000). The Council ultimately admitted it had not responded to the SDN within the prescribed 35-day period, and the UT further held that the Council remained in breach for a protracted period. Bence is the first reported case in which the UT has made a finding of contempt by a public authority in an information law case. The decision provides guidance on the respective roles of the FTT and UT in the contempt certification process. It also provides a helpful and comprehensive summary of the contempt regime as it relates to non-compliance with the FTT’s SDNs. Further, the judgment emphasises the seriousness of non-compliance by a public authority and the elements of civil contempt, in conjunction with Buzzard-Quashie, that sanctions for contempt on this basis may be severe. The case is also instructive in illustrating how a public authority may mitigate failures of compliance to avoid investigation and certification of contempt. Written by Gaelyn Fuhrmann, legal director at Wiggin LLP.

This Practice Note considers the exemption for personal information under section 40 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FIA 2000). Scope of the exemption This is a class-based exemption. Most of its elements are absolute, but two aspects are qualified (ie subject to a public interest test). The exemption’s aim is to avoid a conflict between the data protection regime, which protects personal data, and the objectives of FIA 2000 to increase transparency and accountability. Article 15 of Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (UK GDPR) provides data subjects with the right to obtain from the controller confirmation as to whether or not personal data concerning themselves is being processed. A request for this information is known as a data subject access request (and is also commonly referred to as a ‘SAR’ or ‘DSAR’). For background reading, see Practice Notes: Introduction to the EU GDPR and UK GDPR and The Data Protection Act 2018. For information on the processing of personal data for law enforcement purposes and by the intelligence services, see Practice Note: Processing personal

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. The freedom of information regime in the UK is governed by the following key pieces of legislation: • Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FIA 2000) • Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004, SI 2004/3244 The use of and rights to information are monitored by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). The ICO provides guidance to assist public authorities in interpreting FIA 2000. The guidance establishes the parameters of FIA 2000, the obligations for public authorities under FIA 2000 and the rights of members of the public when requesting information. The Freedom of Information Code of Practice provides guidance for authorities in discharging their responsibilities under FIA 2000. While the code is not directly binding, breach of the code is likely to result in some form of breach under FIA 2000. Entities affected by FIA 2000 Public authorities include government departments, local authorities, the NHS, state schools and police forces. A full list of bodies regarded

In brief The timeframe for compliance with a freedom of information request is 20 working days, although in certain limited circumstances this can be extended. Upon receipt of a request, an authority should: • record the date on which the request was received • assess the validity of the request • establish whether information of the description specified in the request is held by the authority • estimate the cost of compliance • consider charging a fee • consider whether any exemptions apply • respond to the applicant within the timeframe For information on the freedom of information regime generally, see Practice Notes: • Introduction to freedom of information • Who is subject to the freedom of information regime For an overview of the whole process

The Cabinet Office has published the Freedom of Information statistics: annual 2024 bulletin. This bulletin presents headline statistics for Freedom of Information (FOI) requests in central government for 2024, including key breakdowns by monitored body. The latest FOI statistics reveal an increase in the number of requests received, paired with a reduction in the number of requests responded to on time.

The Export Credits Guarantee Department (ECGD) is the UK's official export credit agency. It operates under the name UK Export Finance (UKEF). UKEF is a department of central government. Its purpose is to promote UK exports by preserving the competitiveness of UK exporters against overseas exporters which benefit from the support of their own export credit agency. It does this by providing support to UK exporters through guarantees, insurance, direct lending and impartial guidance. For more information, see Practice Note: UK Export Finance (UKEF). Lenders that provide finance for UKEF supported exports and UK exporters requesting UKEF support will need to provide information to UKEF about the particular export involved and their business activities in general. Where such information is confidential or commercially sensitive, the lenders and UK exporters will be concerned that the information they provide to UKEF is kept confidential. Like all government departments, UKEF is subject to freedom of information legislation. Broadly speaking: • the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FIA 2000) covers non-environmental

Applicants under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FIA 2000) should have a right to complain to a public authority if their request for information is refused in whole or in part, or if they are otherwise unhappy with the authority’s handling of their request. Although it is not a legal requirement that public authorities have an internal review procedure in place under the FIA 2000, the Freedom of Information Code of Practice (the Code) recommends that every authority should have such a procedure as a matter of best practice. The Code is not legally binding, but it provides guidance for public authorities on best practice in fulfilling their duties under the FIA 2000. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) helps to promote the Code and may take action against, or make recommendations to, an authority for poor practice, even if this does not amount to a breach of the FIA 2000. The Code stipulates that the complaints procedure should provide a fair, thorough and prompt review of actions and decisions taken under the FIA

ARCHIVED: This Precedent has been archived and is not maintained. [Name] [Address] Ref No: [number] [Date]

ARCHIVED: This Precedent has been archived and is not maintained. [Name] [Address] Ref No: [number] [Date] Dear [applicant's name] Thank you for your [letter OR email OR fax] of [date of letter/email/fax from applicant]

ARCHIVED: This Precedent has been archived and is not maintained. [Name] [Address] Ref No: [number] [Date] Dear [applicant's name] Thank you for your [letter OR email OR fax] of [date of letter/email/fax from applicant] requesting information about [insert details]. We have now completed searching for the information you requested. [I