Dr Jesús Antonio Siller Farfán v (1) The Information Commissioner (2) The Governing Body of the University of Central Lancashire: [2026] UKUT 16 (AAC)
Upper Tribunal Administrative Appeals Chamber decision by Judge Stout on 12 January 2026.
Read the full decision in .
Judicial Summary
This case concerned a request for information made to the second respondent university for information about a decision made by the University and Colleges Employers Association (UCEA), which information was in the university’s possession by virtue of its Vice-Chancellor being on the board of UCEA. The First-tier Tribunal upheld the Information Commissioner’s decision that the university had been entitled to withhold the information on the basis that it was not “held” by it within the meaning of section 1(1) and 3(2)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The Upper Tribunal considers the approach that is to be taken to determining whether a public authority is not holding information to any extent on its own behalf so that it falls outside the Act by virtue of section 3(2)(a), and decides that separate consideration should be given to whether the information is “held” and on whose behalf it is held. The focus when considering the latter should be on the nature of the connection between the public authority and the information, not on whether the connection is ‘sufficient’ or ‘rational’ or whether the public authority has ‘an interest’ in the information. Where the public authority is acting as agent for a third party in relation to the information, the information will not normally fall within the scope of FOIA (The Scottish Ministers v The Scottish Information Commissioner [2023] CSIH 46 and Ian Graham v The Scottish Information Commissioner [2019] CSIH 57 doubted.) In this case, the First-tier Tribunal had in substance taken the correct approach in principle and had reached a conclusion on the facts of this case that was open to it.