6th November 2025
Public-interest campaigner Alan M. Dransfield has lodged a formal complaint with the new Secretary of State for Justice, Rt Hon David Lammy MP, alleging “systemic fraud” and “abuse of power” within the UK’s Freedom of Information (FOI) system.
In a letter sent to Mr Lammy this week, Mr Dransfield accuses the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS), and multiple public authorities of unlawfully weaponising the 2015 court ruling known as the “Dransfield Vexatious Precedent.”
A Precedent Turned Barrier
Mr Dransfield was the original appellant in Dransfield v Information Commissioner (2012–2015), a case that established how authorities can refuse “vexatious” FOI requests under Section 14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
However, he now claims that this precedent has been distorted into what he describes as a “fraudulent blanket ban” — a pretext used by public bodies to block legitimate information requests without fair assessment.
“Section 14(1) has been converted into a catch-all exemption and, in many cases, a fraudulent device for public authorities wishing to evade transparency,” Mr Dransfield wrote.
He cites examples including a 2018 ICO letter in which five separate FOI requests were allegedly dismissed under a single decision notice, and claims he now faces an effective lifetime ban on submitting FOI requests.
Transparency and Safety at Stake
Mr Dransfield argues that the misuse of the “vexatious” label has concealed issues of public safety, including alleged failings in lightning protection systems, school infrastructure, and NHS facilities.
He also claims that similar tactics are now being applied to data protection Subject Access Requests (SARs) under the UK GDPR, where his applications have been deemed “manifestly unfounded” due to historical behaviour.
“No government body is permitted to impose lifelong bans on statutory rights,” he insists.
Call for Ministerial Investigation
In his complaint, Mr Dransfield urges the Ministry of Justice to launch an independent investigation into the ICO and tribunal system’s handling of Section 14(1) FOIA, and to reassess the legality of the Dransfield precedent in light of human rights and fairness principles.
He has requested:
- An independent review of the misuse of Section 14(1) FOIA;
- A review of compatibility with Articles 6 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights;
- A directive for the ICO to end the use of “blanket bans”; and
- A review of alleged irregularities in HMCTS court documentation.
Mr Dransfield’s letter concludes that the current situation represents a “perversion of the course of justice and maladministration of the highest order.”
Background and Reaction
The Dransfield precedent, upheld by the Court of Appeal in 2015, has guided how public bodies interpret “vexatious” FOI requests for nearly a decade. While the ruling aimed to curb abuse of the system, campaigners like Mr Dransfield argue it has since been over-extended, curtailing the public’s right to access information.
Neither the Ministry of Justice nor the Information Commissioner’s Office had issued a comment at the time of going to press.
Mr Dransfield, who describes himself as a “public interest litigant and FOI campaigner”, says he will continue to press for reform.
“The misuse of the Dransfield ruling has corrupted the FOI system and denied thousands of requesters their legal rights,” he told the Romiley Gazette. “It’s time to bring transparency back to public life.”
