Info Gov

A claimant has launched a judicial review challenge against the Government, alleging its failure to proactively release a set of reports on energy plans for heating homes is in breach of the Environmental Information Regulations (EIRs).

Environmental campaigner and journalist Ben Webster's claim centres on requests for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) to share reports it holds on the future availability and cost of hydrogen for home heating.

Webster asked to see the reports in August 2023 as part of an investigation.

Responding to the request made under EIR, DESNZ confirmed that it held four reports but refused to release them, arguing that they were part of a decision-making process that was not yet complete.

Webster and the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) took the case to the Information Tribunal, but shortly before a hearing on the matter, the DESNZ released three of the reports.

DESNZ is appealing against a First Tier Tribunal ruling ordering it to release the fourth report.

Webster's lawyers at Leigh Day said his judicial review claim argues that the reports contain relevant and important information about environmental policy, and should have been published proactively under regulation 4 of the EIR.

Regulation 4 requires government bodies to share information which is relevant and important in the framing of major environmental policy proposals, and to “progressively make [environmental] information available to the public”.

In December 2025, Webster raised concerns with DESNZ that it was not complying with its duty under regulation 4 of the EIR and sought further information as to how the duty was being applied.

Leigh Day said that the response “showed that the DESNZ had not referred to or discussed the duty at all over a two-year period”, and interpreted the duty as only applying to policies and proposals that are already in the public domain as opposed to those still being developed.

The claim form, filed in March 2026, argues that the DESNZ’s interpretation of the regulation 4 duty to share information is too narrow, and that more steps need to be taken to proactively publish environmental information relating to major policy proposals.

It also raises concerns that this approach is mirrored across other government departments, with Webster alleging to have experienced similar issues when requesting information from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra).

The legal action has been endorsed by the Campaign for Freedom of Information.

Ben Webster said the challenge would "force the government to adopt an active publication policy on vital environmental issues", adding: "If government departments published more information proactively, they would need to spend less time, and money, responding to freedom of information requests."

Leigh Day solicitor, Julia Eriksen said: “Upon receiving and reviewing the reports, Mr Webster felt it was apparent that the information should have been published proactively under duties laid out in the Environmental Information Regulations.

“He hopes that the High Court will agree with his assessment that the DESNZ’s interpretation of these requirements to share environmental information is too narrow.”

The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero has been approached for comment.

Also in this section

Sep 23, 2026

Redacted rights: When does Article 10 ECHR confer a right to information?

A three-judge panel of the Upper Tribunal (Lady Poole, UTJ Citron and UTJ Brewer) in Cruelty Free International v Information Commissioner & Home Office [2026] UKUT 328 (AAC) has held that Article 10 ECHR can, in narrow circumstances, confer a right to receive information from a public authority - but that this particular Appellant still cannot have any. Georgina Pein analyses the ruling.
Sep 22, 2026

Tribunal blasts ICO for deciding EIR complaint without seeing withheld information

The First-tier Tribunal has dismissed an appeal against an Information Commissioner decision that a council's correspondence with a local newspaper about a resident was the resident's own personal data, but has criticised the Commissioner for reaching that decision without seeing the withheld information or engaging with the council, an approach it said caused months of delay and unnecessary cost.
Sep 18, 2026

Sector-wide hostility not enough for section 38(2) NCND "endangering effect" exemption

The Home Office was not entitled to neither confirm nor deny whether it held audit records for the Envigo RMS Belton animal research facility, the First-tier Tribunal has ruled, finding that evidence of a hostile environment around animal research did not establish the causal link to endangerment that section 38(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires.
Sep 14, 2026

Tribunal upholds NI Prison Service refusal to reveal body scanner hit rate despite "wider public interest"

The First-tier Tribunal has dismissed an appeal against the Northern Ireland Prison Service's (NIPS) refusal to disclose how many X-ray body scans of prisoners produced a positive indication and how many led to the recovery of contraband, finding that the figures would be likely to prejudice the prevention of crime and the maintenance of prison security under section 31 of the Freedom of…
Sep 14, 2026

Ofqual overturns ICO order to disclose braille exam error notifications by consent

The Information Commissioner has conceded a First-tier Tribunal appeal by Ofqual and agreed that event notifications submitted by exam boards about errors in braille versions of GCSE and A level papers can be withheld under section 31(1)(g) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, reversing a decision notice in which he had rejected the exemption and ordered disclosure.
Sep 14, 2026

Tribunal overturns "manifestly unreasonable" refusal after council's email tally falls apart

The First-tier Tribunal has ordered North Tyneside Council to respond afresh to a request for records about a school boundary fence after finding the council was not entitled to refuse it as manifestly unreasonable under regulation 12(4)(b) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, and that the evidence it relied on to show a burdensome course of dealings did not bear scrutiny.

InfoGov Masthead Newsletter 800