Cruelty Free International v 1) Information Commissioner 2) Home Office: [2026] UKUT 328 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision of Lady Poole, Judge Citron and Judge Brewer on 21 August 2026.
Read the full decision in .
Judicial Summary
An organisation opposed to the testing of cosmetics on animals sought information about grants of licences by the Home Office for scientific testing involving animals. The Home Office declined to disclose certain information sought by the organisation, relying on an exemption in section 44 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in conjunction with section 24 of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. The Information Commissioner’s decision that the Home Office was entitled to rely on that exemption was upheld by the First-tier Tribunal. The Upper Tribunal allowed the appeal, set aside the First-tier Tribunal’s decision, and re-made it, again refusing the appeal but for different reasons, holding that:
(1) The Upper Tribunal and the First-tier Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine the issues raised in the appeal. The First-tier Tribunal had not concluded it lacked such jurisdiction, so had not materially erred in law;
(2) Tribunals were not precluded by precedent from recognising the limited right to receive information inherent in article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The First-tier Tribunal’s decision involved an error of law in that regard. The organisation’s article 10 right to receive information had been violated in the circumstances of this case. However, on re-making the decision, the appeal still fell to be refused because it was not possible to read the legislation preventing disclosure compatibly with Convention rights, and the Upper Tribunal had no power to grant a declaration of incompatibility.