/ Data Access & Compliance Unit
Information Directorate
Wakefield Civil Justice Centre
Mulberry Way
Wakefield
WF1 2QN
E:F&

Mr N Gilliatt

Our Ref:IR/104316/HG / 26th April 2016

Dear Mr N Gilliatt

Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) – Outcome of Internal Review

Thank you for your Internal Review request dated 29 March 2016 regarding a FOI 103362 in which you asked for:

Please see news article relating to a recent court case.

aringey_council_tax_court_charges_1_4433179

/Quote/

..... Lord Justice Hamblen said it was “factually incorrect” that

Haringey Council charged everyone for court hearings in 2013/14.

Haringey Council did charge a “lump sum” to everyone when sending

out a court summons, but this figure did not include court hearing

costs.

They waived any further costs which came about after sending the

court summons.

“There is nothing unlawful in resolving to charge the maximum

[costs]”, Lord Justice Hamblen said. “But the council was not

seeking the maximum costs.”

The costs Haringey Council claimed from residents were actually

slightly less than the council incurred, he explained.

And these costs could legitimately include legal fees, admin costs

and overheads.

Lord Justice Hamblen said the costs Haringey Council charged were

“not unreasonable”.

/End Quote/

In context of the high standards required by the Royal Courts of Justice,

please disclose the specific information which enabled Lord Justice Hamblen

to determine the above.’

You have requested an internal review for the following reason:

I am writing to request an internal review of Ministry of Justice's handling of my FOI request 'Lord Justice Hamblen on Haringey Council's court costs'.
This information requires disclosing in the public interest.
Even if it provides evidence that members of the public are being defrauded by local authorities and the judicial system that is no basis on which to withhold the requested information.”

Your request has been passed to me because I have responsibility for answering requests relating to data in HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS). HMCTS is an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and is responsible for the administration of the magistrates' courts, the Crown Court, county courts, the High Court, Court of Appeal and Tribunals in England and Wales and non-devolved tribunals in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

The purpose of an Internal Review is to assess how yourFOI request was handled in the first instance and to determine whether the original decision given to you was correct.This is an independent review: I was not involved in the original decision.

I have reassessed your case and after careful consideration I have concluded that the initial response that was sent to you was compliantwith the requirements of the FOIA. An explanation of my decision follows.
I am satisfied that your original FOIA request was answered within the statutory 20 day deadline.
It was explained to you that MoJ holds the information that you asked for, but that we would not be providing it to you as it is exempt from disclosure.It was also explained to you that MoJ is not obliged to provide you with the information as it is contained in relevant case files which are part of a court record; therefore section 32(1) of the FOIA does apply.

The specific information which enabled Lord Justice Hamblen to make his judgement is part of the court proceedings which are part of the court file. They are not held for any other purpose. Section 32 exempts information contained in the court files being provided under the FOIA regardless of the content and the reasons that have been provided for disclosing. No public interest test is required as it is an absolute exemption.

It was further explained to you that we are not obliged, under section 40(2) of the FOIA, to provide information to you that is the personal information of another person. Releasing the requested information would contravene the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA), as we would consider that its disclosure would be unfair.The DPA requires us to process personal data fairly and lawfully (Principal 1 of the DPA Act) and we have a requirement to protect the interests of the individuals whose personal data is being processed. Without the consent of the individual whose personal data falls within the scope of the request, MoJ does not forward on their information. Doing so would be considered unlawful and unfair. The terms of this exemption in the FOIA means that we do not have to consider whether or not it would be in the public interest for you to have the information.

I can confirm to you that checks were made with policy officials to ensure that the correct exemptions were applied. I can therefore confirm that both exemptions were applied correctly. It may help to explain that under the FOIA, Section 32(1) and section 40(2) exemptions are absolute exemptions; therefore there is no legal requirement to consider the public interest. This means that even if there was a public interest reason, it is not a consideration that would require disclosure of the information requested.

I consider that the original response fulfilled the requirements of section 16 of the FOIA, as sufficient advice and assistance were provided to you. It was explained to you that you may wish to apply to the court directly for more information about this case under the Court Procedure Rules (5.4b, 5.4c and 5.4d) and further details were provided to you, including contact details.

I am therefore satisfied that the response you received on 29 March 2016 was correct.

You have the right to appeal our decision if you think it is incorrect. Details can be found in the ‘How to Appeal’ section attached at the end of this letter.

Disclosure Log

You can also view information that the MoJ has disclosed in response to previous FOIA requests. Responses are anonymised and published on our on-line disclosure log which can be found on the MoJ website:

Yours sincerely

H Greensmith

Knowledge Information Liaison Officer

HMCTS Governance and Assurance

How to Appeal

Information Commissioner’s Office

If you remain dissatisfied after an internal review decision, you have the right to apply to the Information Commissioner’s Office. The Commissioner is an independent regulator who has the power to direct us to respond to your request differently, if he considers that we have handled it incorrectly.

You can contact the Information Commissioner’s Office at the following address:

Information Commissioner’s Office,

Wycliffe House,

Water Lane,

Wilmslow,

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Internet address: