Property Search Court Case dismissed
Mr Justice Hickinbottom in the Royal Courts of Justice announced the Judgement on 19th March 2010 of the application of the property Search Company OneSearch Direct regarding City of York Council.
Claimant: OneSearch Direct Holdings Limited (formerly SPH Holdings Limited)(trading as OneSearch Direct)
Defendant: City of York Council
The judgement states:
“MR JUSTICE HICKINBOTTOM:
Introduction
1. This claim raises important issues relating to the access granted by local authorities to others (including, particularly, property search companies), and the charging for such access, where the authority holds information relevant to a property that is being marketed.”
“Conclusion
87. For the reasons I have given, I do not consider that the Council is obliged to allow open access to all of its unrefined property information, and I do not consider its policy document of 6 April 2009 which is based upon that premise, is unlawful. I dismiss the application.
Postscript
88. I appreciate that this case has been described as a test case, and there are more authorities than the Council who have, since last April, not provided full access to unrefined property information. I understand that there are approximately 370 authorities in England and Wales, of which about two-thirds of authorities are providing full access and one-third are not (First Statement of Elizabeth Jarvis dated 14 July 2009 Paragraph 44: and the Explanatory Memorandum to the HIP Amendment Regulations).
89. It may well be that this judgment will resolve some or all issues between PSCs and other local authorities. However, I do not know what those issues might be: and I stress that I have only decided the issues that are before me. As I have indicated, the Council have calculated charges for provision of enquiry answers on a cost recovery only basis. If another Council makes charges that include a significant profit element - and, particularly, if the charges betray an improper use of their monopolistic position in respect of raw data - that may raise different issues, and may result in a different answer from the answer in this case. Whether any particular authority has acted lawfully will inevitably depend upon the facts relating to that particular authority. On those other potential issues, that do not arise in this case, I offer no opinion.
90. Finally, may I thank Mr Fordham, Mr Steele and Mr Coppel for their contribution to this case. Their submissions were, as usual, able and well-focused, and particularly assisted me in identifying and determining the issues raised by this application.”
---
The Panopticon blog has published a topic titled: ACCESS TO PROPERTY SEARCH INFORMATION - TEST CASE IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT” on the 18th March 2010 that states:
“This has been a particularly busy week so far as the law relating to accessing property search information is concerned. On 15 March, I blogged about a new Information Rights Tribunal judgment on the application of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR) to requests for property search information - see my post. On 17-18 March 2010, the Administrative Court (Hickinbotham J) heard a test case judicial review of the policy of City of York Council on access to and charges for property search information under the Local Authorities (England) (Charges for Property Searches) Regulations 2008. The Claimant, Onesearch Direct Limited, maintains that all local authorities have an obligation under the 2008 Regulations to grant it direct access to their property records, and to charge no more than the cost of doing so. It is understood that Onesearch are pursuing their claim under the 2008 Regulations rather than the EIR in part because of the administrative inconvenience of having to wait up to 20 days to receive a response under the EIR (see r. 5(2) EIR). Judgment is expected on Friday 20 March 2010. Jason Coppel represents the Council.”
--
Following the publication of the judgement the media has published articles on the case that include:
The Evening Telegraph
Council 'breaching law over property records refusal' Published on Sun Mar 21 19:13:40 GMT 2010
The Evening Telegraph
Property search company loses court battle
21st March 2010
The Scotsman
Property search company loses court battle
Published Date: 21 March 2010
ICO: 6 Decisions – Is UK Government listening?
Report on Local Data Panel Meetings
Tribunal decision triggers PSI policy rethink
PSI Charging Tribunal Service decision imminent
- 404 reads
