Georgian Constantin v Information Commissioner

1. This appeal was submitted by way of a letter received by post on 10 October 2025. In that letter the appellant states that he is seeking disclosure of a flash drive from Staffordshire Police. He says that he has sought help from the Information Commissioner but ‘the request has been denied’.

2. It is unclear from the letter whether the flash drive contains the appellant’s personal data and whether this may be a complaint about procedural failings by the Commissioner under section 166(2) of the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA), or if this is an appeal relating to a decision notice by the Commissioner about a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), or some other type of appeal or application.

3. The appellant did not complete form GRC1 and the letter did not provide the information required by the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 (the Rules).

4. The tribunal issued case management directions by post on 30 October 2025 which required the appellant to resubmit a Notice of Appeal inf including everything required by the Rules within 28 days. The directions included a list of the information required by the Rules.

5. The case management orders specified that they constituted a formal notice requiring the appellant to remedy any failure to comply with the GRC rules specified in paragraphs 1-8 of that order (the list of the required information) and a formal notice that a failure to comply with the directions could lead to the striking out of proceedings under rule 8(3)(a).

6. No reply has been received from the appellant.

7. In those circumstances I have the power to strike out the appeal under rule 8(3)(a).

8. One of the pieces of information required by the rules is ‘details of the decision or act, or failure to decide or act, to which the proceedings relate’. Without this, the tribunal is unable to determine whether this is an application under section 166(2) DPA or an appeal relating to a decision notice under FOIA or some other type of appeal.

9. Although it was not specified in the case management order, the appellant was also required by the Rules to include a copy of the challenged decision, or, in the case of an application under section 166(2) , a copy of the complaint to the Information Commissioner and any information provided by the Commissioner about progress on the complaint or the outcome of the complaint. That was also not included with the appeal.

10. Without the information required by the Rules (and without a copy of the decision/ section 166 correspondence) the tribunal is not able to progress the appeal, because the nature of the appeal or application is unclear. The appellant has been given the opportunity to remedy this and has failed to respond.

11. In those circumstances, taking into account the overriding objective, it is in the interests of justice and proportionate to strike out the appeal under rule 8(3)(a).

12. If there is a reason why the appellant has been unable to comply, he may apply for the proceedings to be reinstated under rule 8(3)(5). If he wishes to do so he must ensure that all the relevant information is provided, including a copy of the challenged decision or the relevant correspondence with the Information Commissioner. Signed Date: Sophie Buckley 30 December 2025