Invoice for legal advice

Dear Mr Silverman

I am writing in response to your Freedom of Information Request dated
the 11th June 2010.

As I understand it you are requesting the following information:

Mr Batchelor has kindly sent me a copy of your letter to him of
21st May, a copy of which is attached. In it you say:

“In the circumstances, I have been asked to seek an independent
opinion from an external barrister who has advised the Council that your
conduct is potentially actionable in a court of law.” And

“The Council does not wish to be placed in a situation where it is
forced to take legal action against you. Therefore, it requires your
personal written assurance that you will not make any further oral or
written representations to either its Members or officers in relation to
the manner in which your neighbour's planning application was dealt with
or the way in which the Council dealt with your various complaints and
that you will not further disseminate any literature or other
publications to this effect”.

Could you please:

1. Let me know under what law Mr Batchelor’s actions are potentially
actionable.
I can confirm that we hold this information, however the London Borough
of Hillingdon is of the view that this information is subject to Legal
Professional Privilege and that therefore this information is exempt
from the duty to disclose pursuant to S42 of the Freedom of Information
Act 2000 (FOIA) which states that “information in respect of which a
claim to legal professional privilege… could be maintained in legal
proceedings is exempt information”.

We have considered the public interest in this matter and we are of the
view that although there is a public interest in the transparency of
decision making by Public Authorities, this is not strong enough to
outweigh the inherent public interest in maintaining Legal Professional
Privilege. Legal Professional Privilege is a central concept in the
justice system and there is a strong public interest in protecting that
confidentiality. Therefore, there would need to be a compelling argument
in favour of disclosure in order to override that inbuilt public
interest and we are of the view that, in this instance, there is no
compelling argument in favour of disclosure.

2. Let me have a copy of the invoice from the barristers charging for
this advice
As you are aware the Freedom of Information Act 2000 creates a right of
access to information not documentation. I can confirm that we hold
this information and that the cost of the legal advice sought was £875
plus VAT

3. In view of the fact that Mr Batchelor has not given you the written
assurance you asked for and has now made further written representations
to officers and members will the Council be taking him to court?
We can neither confirm or deny whether this information is held.

The information you are requesting relates to our future intentions in
regards to an individual and we are of the opinion that this information
would comprise the personal data of that individual. S40 (2) of the
FOIA states that information is exempt information if it is personal
data and if disclosure would contravene any of the Principles of the
Data Protection Act 1998. Furthermore, S40 (5) (b) (i) states that the
duty to confirm or deny does not arise where to do so would breach any
of the Principles of the Data Protection Act 1998.

Principle 1 of the Data Protection Act 1998 requires personal to be
processed fairly, lawfully and for an appropriate condition for
processing from either Sch 2 or Sch 3 to be satisfied. Bearing in mind
that the FOIA is applicant and purpose blind we are of the view that
there is no legitimate public interest in disclosure that would outweigh
the legitimate interests of the Data Subject. Furthermore, we are of
the view that disclosure would be likely to amount to unfair
processing.

As S40 (2) and S40 (5) are absolute exemptions there is no requirement
to consider the Public Interest.

If you wish to request an internal review of our response you should
write, within 2 months, to:

Office Managing Partner, Legal Services, Civic Centre, High St,
Uxbridge, UB8 1UW (or via email to [Hillingdon Borough Council request email] marked for the
attention of the Office Managing Partner).

Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you
have the right to apply to the Information Commissioner for a decision.
The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: Information
Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire,
SK9 5AF

If you wish to discuss this matter please do not hesitate to contact us
on the details below.

Richard Ingle
Data Protection &
Freedom of Information Officer

Legal Services (3E 04)
London Borough of Hillingdon
Civic Centre
High Street
Uxbridge
UB8 1UW
01895 55(6923)

Please note, all material provided by the London Borough of Hillingdon
in response to your request for information is for your personal,
non-commercial use. The London Borough of Hillingdon reserves all
rights in the copyright of the information provided. Any unauthorised
copying or adaptation of the information without express written
confirmation from The London Borough of Hillingdon will constitute an
infringement of copyright. Any intention to re-use this information
commercially will require consent. Please forward any requests for
re-use of information to the Freedom of Information officer.

show quoted sections

11/06/10 11:16 >>>
Dear Hillingdon Borough Council,

Please find below my e-mail to the Borough Solicitor of 11th June
and a copy of his letter to Mr Batchelor of 21st May

Please note that point 2 in my e-mail is a request for
information
under the FOI act.

From: Hillingdon-Watch
[mailto:[email address]]
Sent: 11 June 2010 11:04
To: Raj Alagh (Borough Solicitor - LB Hillingdon)
Subject: Letter to Mr Batchelor

Mr Alagh,

Mr Batchelor has kindly sent me a copy of your letter to him of
21st May, a copy of which is attached. In it you say:

“In the circumstances, I have been asked to seek an independent
opinion from an external barrister who has advised the Council
that
your conduct is potentially actionable in a court of law.” And

“The Council does not wish to be placed in a situation where it
is
forced to take legal action against you. Therefore, it requires
your personal written assurance that you will not make any
further
oral or written representations to either its Members or officers
in relation to the manner in which your neighbour's planning
application was dealt with or the way in which the Council dealt
with your various complaints and that you will not further
disseminate any literature or other publications to this
effect”.

Could you please:

1. Let me know under what law Mr Batchelor’s actions are
potentially actionable.

2. Let me have a copy of the invoice from the barristers charging
for this advice

3. In view of the fact that Mr Batchelor has not given you the
written assurance you asked for and has now made further written
representations to officers and members will the Council be
taking
him to court?

I look forward to hearing from you.

Peter Silverman
www.hillingdon-watch.org.uk
20 Kingsend, Ruislip, HA4 7DA
01895 625770

Mr R J Batchelor
8 Highfield Crescent
Northwood
Middlesex
HA6 1EZ

Our Ref: 3E/04/RA/HH/RB4

21st May 2010

Dear Mr Batchelor

RE: Planning Application - 7 Highfield Crescent

I note with regret that in spite of my letter dated 19th April
2010, you continue to make representations to Members and
officers
of the Council in relation to the planning decision made in
respect
of 7 Highfield Crescent, Northwood. In particular, I note that
you
wrote to all Hillingdon Members as recently as Monday 17th May,
asking them to intervene on your behalf in your dispute with the
Council. For the avoidance of doubt, I made it clear in my letter
that firstly, you should refrain from corresponding further with
the Council about this matter and secondly, that neither the
Chief
Executive nor any Hillingdon Member has the constitutional power
to
overturn a decision of the Planning Committee, even if it was
felt
appropriate to do so.

I would reiterate in the strongest possible terms that the
Council
considers this matter to be closed. It does not support your
request to hold a public inquiry; neither does it consider it
necessary to issue you with an apology and it will not under any
circumstances agree to pay you damages.

It is unfortunate that you are continuing to waste a great deal
of
time and effort in pursuing a matter which will not be reopened.
The Council's Members and officers have spent, and continue to
spend, a disproportionate amount of time in having to deal with
your correspondence, to the detriment of other Hillingdon
residents. The Council cannot allow this situation to continue.

In the circumstances, I have been asked to seek an independent
opinion from an external barrister who has advised the Council
that
your conduct is potentially actionable in a court of law.

The Council does not wish to be placed in a situation where it is
forced to take legal action against you. Therefore, it requires
your personal written assurance that you will not make any
further
oral or written representations to either its Members or officers
in relation to the manner in which your neighbour's planning
application was dealt with or the way in which the Council dealt
with your various complaints and that you will not further
disseminate any literature or other publications to this effect.
The Council is not seeking to suppress freedom of speech but it
has
a public duty to ensure that its services are not disrupted
unreasonably.

I look forward to receiving your written assurance as soon as
possible. The Council is looking for a final resolution to this
matter once and for all without the need to refer the matter to
the
courts. You may wish to seek your own urgent legal advice before
replying to my letter.

Yours sincerely

Rajesh Alagh
Borough Solicitor

Yours faithfully,

Peter Silverman

show quoted sections