In HARRON v ROTHERHAM MBC ( 2026 ) UKUT 48 ( AAC ) Judge Stout rules that is for the Information Commissioner to decide whether a response to a substituted decision is compliant with FoIA. The FTT is NOT empowered to compel compliance with substituted decision notices. The law of contempt does NOT create any secondary cause of action or open up any new substantive jurisdiction.
Subscribe
Get an email when we publish a new post on this blog. We’ll never share your email and you can unsubscribe any time. Our use of your details is explained in our privacy policy.
"*" indicates required fields
Headings
- Best Value (13)
- Capital Finance and Companies (64)
- Council Tax and Rates (88)
- Decision making and Contracts (296)
- Elections and Bylaws (42)
- Environment, Highways and Leisure (138)
- General (24)
- Housing (169)
- Human Rights and Public Sector Equality Duty (124)
- Judicial Control, Liability and Litigation (257)
- Land, Goods and Services (84)
- Local Authority Powers (75)
- Non Judicial Control (21)
- Planning and Environmental (195)
- Social Care (90)
- Standards (26)
Disclaimer
This blog is maintained for information purposes only. It is not intended to be a source of legal advice and must not be relied upon as such. Blog posts reflect the views and opinions of their individual authors, not of chambers as a whole.
Comments are closed.
11KBW, 11 King’s Bench Walk, Temple, London EC4Y 7EQ | Tel: 020 7632 8500 | © 11KBW 2026