Dear Alex and Francis, many thanks to both for your advice and thanks Alex for sharing your experiences!
I am sure the ICO will be writing to me as well as soon as the AHRC's Notice of Appeal is formally communicated to them by the Tribunal - but to make sure that I'm kept in the loop, I have now also written to both the ICO and the AHRC to notify them of my intention to submit an application to be joined, and to ask them to provide me with the Tribunal's reference number as soon as they know it. I'll then email the Tribunal to ask for the appropriate form. Best wishes Michael On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Alex Skene <[email protected]> wrote: > The ICO is meant to let you know of the appeal - in my case > (<<http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/cycle_hire_contract_redacted_inf > >> > FS50387116 / EA/2012/0002) I received an email from them stating > > ===== > "I write to advise you that this matter has now been passed to the > Information > Commissioner’s Solicitors as the public authority has appealed to the > First-tier Tribunal > (Information Rights) against Decision Notice FS50387116 dated 5 December > 2011. > > Should you require any further information please contact: > [FTT address] / E: [email protected] > > The First-tier Tribunal (Information Rights) website contains details > of current appeals > and information about stages of appeals, including hearing dates. As > the Respondent > the Commissioner will not be able to keep you informed about further > developments > on the appeal. > > If you wish to be joined as a party to the appeal you should contact the > First- > tier Tribunal (Information Rights) using the details above, quoting the > relevant > information, including reference numbers. It will be a matter for the > Tribunal whether > to join a person to an appeal." > ======== > > Emailing them, I was asked to complete an application form giving > reasons why I wanted to apply to be joined. I asked for additional > guidance for this,because as you've spotted, there is none on their > website, but none was forthcoming. I'm still deciding on whether to > apply, but I think I've now left it too late, and I definitely won't > be able to take 3 days off work for the oral hearing that's now > scheduled for my case. > > At a recent FOI workshop on the FTT hosted by > http://requestinitiative.org/ the advice given to me there was to go > for it. > > It allows you to provide the requester's point of view which the ICO > will not do, as they're intended to be a neutral 3rd party. If you > think the ICO's Decision Notice or the original refusal notices didn't > add up, you're able to make the common sense argument, or (and this is > important) very case-specific public test arguments, as public > authorities tend to fall into the trap of using generic ones which > don't normally stand up at Tribunal. Deadlines are very important > when submitting things, and can lead to an appeal being struck out if > any are missed. > > One of the speakers at this workshop was Gregg Muttitt, and I'd > recommend you read the blogpost he's written on appearing at Tribunal > as it gives some great tips: > <<http://www.fuelonthefire.com/?page=blog>> > > There are some more general tips on the FTT here written by a > contributor to foiwiki with first-hand experience, although they apply > more to appealing the ICO decision. > << > http://foiwiki.com/foiwiki/index.php/How_to_appeal_to_the_First-Tier_Tribunal_(Information_Rights) > >> > > > Cheers > Alex > > On 27 March 2012 09:32, Michael Bimmler <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear all, > > > > I wonder whether someone with practical experience can tell me about > this: > > > > I have a case (http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/big_society) where > the > > ICO has issued a Decision Notice (FS50390437) against the Arts & > Humanities > > Research Council (AHRC), requiring it to disclose certain records. > > > > The AHRC have emailed me today to say that they have submitted an appeal > to > > the First-tier Tribunal (Information Rights), as of course they are > entitled > > to do so. > > > > Now, I am aware that under the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure I (and > indeed > > anyone) can make an application to be joined as additional party to the > > proceedings. However, on the tribunal website, there are also informal > > references to the fact that the Tribunal can join additional parties > (e.g. > > the public authority if the original requester appeals, or the original > > requester if the public authority appeals), *either on its own motion or > > upon their request*. > > > > Does anyone have any clues as to how / when the Tribunal decides to join > an > > original requester / ICO complainant to the appeal on its own motion? > Also, > > am I supposed to receive an official letter from the Tribunal, saying > "The > > AHRC has submitted a Notice of Appeal - this is our case number > xxx/yyyy. If > > you want to be joined as Additional Party, you need to return the > enclosed > > form"? > > > > Or is the burden on me to simply write to the Tribunal right now, saying > "I > > heard that the AHRC submitted a Notice of Appeal yesterday, could you > please > > join me to the proceedings?" > > > > Last, but perhaps most importantly, do people have recommendations on > > whether it's worth the trouble to seek to become an additional party? My > > instincts tell me to do so, not least because it would allow me to see > what > > the Information Commissioner argues, and as an Additional Party I could > then > > make further submissions if I believe that the IC's response omits > something > > (one never knows) or if I feel I have pertinent points to make in > response > > to the AHRC's submissions. Also, given that the Tribunal rarely awards > > costs, there would not be much risk for me in doing so. On the other > hand, I > > guess the case could also be made that I should just sit back and watch > AHRC > > and ICO play it out - but if I understand correctly, that would then > prevent > > me from ever joining the proceedings again (i.e. if it goes to the Upper > > Tribunal or even beyond), I could never become "reinvolved"(?). > > > > Many thanks in advance for all help and guidance... > > > > Michael > > > > -- > > Michael Bimmler > > > > UK address: > > Merton College > > University of Oxford > > Oxford OX1 4JD > > United Kingdom > > +44 1865 280 000 extension 21828 > > +44 7824 181 743 > > [email protected] > > > > Switzerland address: > > Zuerichstrasse 119 > > 8700 Kuesnacht (Zurich) > > Switzerland > > +41 44 912 20 18 > > +41 79 864 88 18 > > [email protected] > > > > _______________________________________________ > > developers-public mailing list > > [email protected] > > > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public > > > > Unsubscribe: > > > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/alex%40alexskene.com > > _______________________________________________ > developers-public mailing list > [email protected] > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public > > Unsubscribe: > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/mbimmler%40gmail.com > -- Michael Bimmler UK address: Merton College University of Oxford Oxford OX1 4JD United Kingdom +44 1865 280 000 extension 21828 +44 7824 181 743 [email protected] Switzerland address: Zuerichstrasse 119 8700 Kuesnacht (Zurich) Switzerland +41 44 912 20 18 +41 79 864 88 18 [email protected]
_______________________________________________ developers-public mailing list [email protected] https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public Unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/archive%40mail-archive.com
