BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber)


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) >> Harron v Information Commissioner and Rotherham MBKC (Information rights: practice and procedure, Tribunal procedure and practice - tribunal jurisdiction) [2024] UKUT 275 (AAC) (05 September 2024)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/AAC/2024/275.html
Cite as: [2024] UKUT 275 (AAC)

[New search] [Contents list] [Printable PDF version] [Help]



Harron v Information Commissioner and Rotherham MBKC [2024] UKUT 275 (AAC) (5 September 2024)


First-tier Tribunal (FTT) struck out appeal on basis that it had no jurisdiction under rule 8(2) of the FTT (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules - neither respondent seeking strike out of the whole appeal on this basis - discusses what FTT's `jurisdiction' means in this context - appeal allowed as FTT had not read properly and fully the Notice of Appeal and therefore decided its lack of jurisdiction on an incomplete and wrong basis - properly construed, the FTT had jurisdiction to determine the appeal- strike out applications remitted to a new FTT to decide if instead the appeal should be struck out on the basis that it has no reasonable prospect of success.

A HTML version of this file is not available click here or view below the pdf version : [2024] UKUT 275 (AAC)


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/AAC/2024/275.html