The First-tier Tribunal has dismissed an appeal brought by an FOI requester who challenged the Ministry of Justice’s claim that it no longer held records about the educational and professional background of a senior tribunal official. The panel found, on the balance of probabilities, that the information had been destroyed in line with a two year retention policy.
In Ilkay Cetin v Information Commissioner [2026] UKFTT 91 (GRC), the FTT upheld a decision of the Information Commissioner, concluding that the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) did not hold further information sought about the qualifications and professional background of the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s Registrar.
The appellant, Ilkay Cetin, had submitted a detailed Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) request in September 2024 seeking confirmation of the Registrar’s identity, salary history, educational qualifications, and prior professional experience. While the MoJ initially stated that it held none of the requested information, it later revised its position, disclosing some material and withholding other elements under section 40(2) FOIA.
A key issue in the appeal was the MoJ’s contradictory statements. In November 2024, during its internal review, the department indicated that it held information about the Registrar’s qualifications and experience. However, by April 2025 it stated that any such records - contained in the Registrar’s 2017 job application - had been destroyed under a two year retention policy.
Cetin argued that the MoJ’s shifting position was implausible and that the Information Commissioner had failed to investigate adequately. She contended that HR practices would require retention of qualification records for current employees and that the Commissioner had accepted the MoJ’s claims “at face value”.
The Tribunal accepted that the MoJ’s initial statement that it held the information was erroneous, but found no evidence of bad faith. It noted that once the Commissioner began investigating, the MoJ conducted “sufficiently rigorous” searches across HR, the Upper Tribunal, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal business areas.
The MoJ also provided its internal retention policy, which requires recruitment documents - including applications and supporting materials - to be destroyed two years after a hiring decision. The Tribunal accepted that the Registrar’s application materials had been disposed of in line with this policy.
Judge Peri Mornington, sitting with two tribunal members, concluded that the Commissioner was entitled to rely on the MoJ’s account in the absence of evidence suggesting inadequate searches or a motive to withhold information.
The Tribunal emphasised that its role was not to determine what information the MoJ ought to have retained, but whether it did hold the information at the time of the request. On that basis, it found that “on the balance of probabilities” no further information existed.
While the Tribunal acknowledged the appellant’s concerns about transparency in quasi judicial roles, it held that such issues fell outside its jurisdiction. The decision reinforces the principle that FOIA cannot compel disclosure of information that no longer exists, even where the requester believes it should have been retained.
The appeal was dismissed in full.
