Tribunal backs Gambling Commission in FOI privacy dispute over former MP

The First-tier Tribunal has upheld the Gambling Commission’s refusal to confirm or deny whether it held correspondence with former Redcar MP Anna Turley, finding that doing so would disclose her personal data and breach data protection law.

In George Greenwood v Information Commissioner & Gambling Commission [2026] UKFTT 194 (GRC), journalist George Greenwood had sought “all email correspondence between Anna Turley… and [senior Gambling Commission officials]” between January 2020 and July 2024.

For most of that period, Ms Turley was not an MP, having lost her seat in 2019 before being re‑elected in 2024. The Tribunal noted that the request therefore concerned “possible activities of an individual who at the time was a private citizen not holding a public office”.

The Gambling Commission refused to confirm or deny whether it held any such correspondence, arguing that doing so would itself reveal personal data about Ms Turley and would be unlawful under the Data Protection Act 2018.

It told the requester that “*confirming whether we do or do not hold information… would constitute the disclosure of personal data and would not be fair and lawful*”.

The Information Commissioner upheld that position in a December 2024 decision notice, concluding that although there was a legitimate interest in transparency around lobbying, this did not outweigh Ms Turley’s privacy rights during a period when she was not a public office holder.

Greenwood appealed, arguing that former MPs should expect scrutiny and that the request related to professional activity rather than sensitive personal information.

However, the Tribunal described the appeal as “entirely speculative”, noting that the requester had provided “no evidence” of misconduct by Ms Turley. It emphasised that the existence or non‑existence of correspondence “is personal data relating to Ms Turley which is protected from disclosure”.

The panel agreed with the Commissioner that a private individual would have a reasonable expectation that any correspondence with a regulator would not be disclosed to the world at large.

While acknowledging “some public interest” in transparency around lobbying, the Tribunal held that this was “clearly outweighed” by Ms Turley’s rights, particularly given the safeguards already in place through the MPs’ Code of Conduct.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, concluding that the Gambling Commission was entitled to rely on section 40(5) FOIA and neither confirm nor deny whether it held the requested information.