The Information Commissioner v (1) Poplar Housing and Regeneration Community Association (2) People's Information Centre
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | The Hon Mrs Justice Farbey Chamber Pesident |
| Neutral Citation | [2020] UKUT 182 (AAC) |
| Court | Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) |
| Date | 08 June 2020 |
| Subject Matter | European Union law,Information rights,European Union law - other,Information rights - Environmental information - general,Farbey,J |
| Published date | 09 July 2020 |
The Information Commissioner v (1) Poplar Housing and Regeneratio n Community Association (2)
People's Information Centre: [2020] UKUT 182 (AAC)
1
GIA/1078/2019
Appeal No.: GIA/1078/2019
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER
ON APPEAL FROM:
First-Tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber)
Information Rights (Case No.: EA/2018/0199)
Before:
MRS JUSTICE FARBEY CP
Appellant: The Information Commissioner
Respondents: (1) Poplar Housing and Regeneration Community Association
(2) People's Information Centre
Hearing date: 11 and 12 February 2020
Ms Laura Elizabeth John (instructed by The Information Commissioner Legal Division)
appeared for the Appellant
Mr Rupert Paines (instructed by Capsticks LLP) appeared for the First Respondent
The Second Respondent did not appear and was not represented
DECISION
The appeal is dismissed. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal promulgated on 27 February
2019 under reference EA/2018/0199 did not involve a material error of law and is not set
aside.
REASONS
Introduction
1. This is an appeal by the Information Commissioner against the decision of the First-tier
Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) (“FTT”) in which it concluded that the first
respondent (a housing association to which I shall refer as “Poplar”) is not a “public
authority” within the meaning of article 2(2)(c) of the Environmental Information
Regulations 2004 (“the Regulations”). In so finding, the FTT disagreed with the
The Information Commissioner v (1) Poplar Housing and Regeneratio n Community Association (2)
People's Information Centre: [2020] UKUT 182 (AAC)
2
GIA/1078/2019
Information Commissioner's decision that Poplar's failure to disclose information to the
second respondent was in breach of its duty to make information available under the
Regulations.
2. The FTT itself granted permission to appeal. The grounds of appeal concern the correct
interpretation of article 2(2)(b) of Directive 2003/4/EC of 28 January 2003 on public
access to environmental information (“the Directive”) which in turn reflects article
2(2)(b) of the Aarhus Convention on access to information, public participation in
decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters (“the Convention”). The
emphasis on the Directive comes about because the Regulations transpose the Directive
into domestic law and give it effect. The principal question that I must decide is whether
the FTT made a material error of law by concluding that Poplar is not a “public authority”
within the meaning of article 2(2)(b) of the Directive.
3. Poplar resists the grounds of appeal. In addition, Poplar relies on other grounds on which
it was unsuccessful in the FTT. In the event, it has not been necessary for me to
determine those other grounds.
Factual background
4. The relevant factual background may be taken from the FTT's decision. Poplar is a
community benefit society incorporated under the Co-operative and Community Benefit
Societies Act 2014. It was set up with a transfer of some of the housing stock of the
London Borough of Tower Hamlets in 1998. It provides housing and is involved in joint
ventures with private developers to redevelop and deliver a proportion of investment in
new housing in the area. It is a private company limited by guarantee. It owns and
manages about 9000 homes, as well as community facilities and commercial property.
5. Poplar is registered with the Regulator of Social Housing (“RSH”) as a private registered
provider of social housing. In its decision, the FTT observed:
“12. A registered provider of social housing is in effect a landlord of
low-cost rental or home ownership accommodation. Registered
providers can be private entities or publicly owned, and may be for-
profit or not-for-profit. Some manage properties originally derived
from local authorities, some purchase and develop new social
housing, some like Poplar do both.
…
14…. In the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, the local authority
is the largest provider of social housing in the area, owning and
managing over 28% of the social housing stock in the Borough.
There are approximately 50 private registered providers of social
housing… in the Borough, registered with the Regulator of Social
Housing…. Poplar owns approximately 13% of the social housing
stock in [Tower Hamlets]. Local authorities who own housing are
automatically registered with the Regulator.
…
22. Poplar received stock transfers of social housing from [Tower
Hamlets] in 1998, 2000, 2006, 2007 and 2009. Poplar has certain
To continue reading
Request your trial
6 cases
-
National Grid Metering Limited
...into UK law. 28. Through caselaw, most recently in Information Commissioner v Poplar Housing and Community Regeneration Association [2020] UKUT 182 (AAC), the definition of Regulation 2(2)(c) of the EIR has been developed to include a dual test which will determine if an organisation falls ......
-
The National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty
...Commissioner [2016] AACR 39 and subsequently in Information Commissioner v Poplar Housing and Community Regeneration Association [2020] UKUT 182 (AAC), the Upper Tribunal further interpreted the judgement in Fish Legal CJEU as laying out a dual functional test which requires two distinct co......
-
Hayle Harbour Authority
...Commissioner [2016] AACR 39 and subsequently in Information Commissioner v Poplar Housing and Community Regeneration Association [2020] UKUT 182 (AAC), the Upper Tribunal further interpreted the judgement in Fish Legal CJEU as laying out a dual functional test which requires two distinct co......
-
BBC
...Commissioner [2016] AACR 39 and subsequently in Information Commissioner v Poplar Housing and Community Regeneration Association [2020] UKUT 182 (AAC), the Upper Tribunal further interpreted the judgement in Fish Legal CJEU as laying out a dual functional test which requires two distinct co......
Request a trial to view additional results