{
 "schema": "ghf-wdtk-thread/1",
 "id": "WB-0405",
 "ev": "EV-0605",
 "wiki": "https://greathousefarmwiki.wordpress.com/evidence/ev-0605-whatdotheyknow-hmcts-bp-properties-v-buckler-1974-records/",
 "slug": "freedom_of_information_request_a_2133",
 "title": "Freedom of Information Request – Administrative Records for BP Properties Ltd v Buckler (1974)",
 "authority": "HM Courts and Tribunals Service (Ministry of Justice)",
 "url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133",
 "wdtk_status": "Partially successful",
 "status": "partially successful",
 "references": [
  "FOI 260201005",
  "IR 260226049"
 ],
 "sent": "2026-01-28",
 "last_message": "2026-04-11",
 "outcome": "Not held by the MoJ as a public authority; records would be court records; preserved records would be at Glamorgan Archives.",
 "deadlines": [
  {
   "label": "Response (20 working days)",
   "from_": "2026-02-01",
   "due": "2026-02-27",
   "answered": "2026-02-26",
   "result": "met"
  },
  {
   "label": "Internal review (20 working days)",
   "from_": "2026-02-26",
   "due": "2026-03-26",
   "answered": "2026-03-26",
   "result": "met"
  }
 ],
 "counts": {
  "messages": 9,
  "sent": 4,
  "received": 5,
  "attachments": 3
 },
 "messages": [
  {
   "n": 1,
   "wdtk_anchor": "outgoing-2007260",
   "direction": "sent",
   "date": "2026-01-28T06:45:43+00:00",
   "from": "Requester",
   "summary": "Request for administrative court records (case numbers, cause lists, register entries, retention data) for BP Properties Ltd v Buckler, Cardiff County Court, July and October 1974.",
   "response_class": "request",
   "body": "Dear HMCTS Freedom of Information Team,\nI am making a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for **administrative and procedural records** held by HM Courts and Tribunals Service relating to the following civil proceedings:\n**Case title:** BP Properties Ltd v Buckler (and/or BP Pension Trust Ltd v Buckler)\n**Court:** Cardiff County Court (or relevant South Glamorgan county court)\n**Year:** 1974\n**Relevant hearings:** July 1974 and on or around 30–31 October 1974\nThis request is limited to **administrative metadata and court records of process**, and does not seek judicial reasoning, pleadings, evidence, or transcripts.\n### Information Requested\n1. **Case identification**\n* The case number(s) / cause number(s) allocated to the above proceedings in 1974.\n2. **Court listings**\n* Copies of, or extracts from, the **Daily Cause Lists / Court Lists** for:\n* the July 1974 hearing; and\n* the hearing listed on or around 30–31 October 1974,\nincluding any outcome annotations (e.g. adjourned, withdrawn, vacated, stood out).\n3. **Administrative outcome**\n* The official administrative status recorded for each of the above hearings, including whether the proceedings were:\n* Adjourned (including adjourned sine die),\n* Stayed,\n* Withdrawn,\n* Discontinued, or\n* Proceeded to final determination.\n4. **Judgment / order confirmation**\n* Confirmation of whether **any final judgment, possession order, or declaration of title** was sealed or entered by the court in respect of these 1974 proceedings.\n* If no such order was entered, please confirm this explicitly.\n5. **Case register / ledger**\n* Any surviving **case register entry, index entry, minute book entry, or case ledger record** showing procedural steps taken and closure status.\n6. **File retention and location**\n* Whether the original physical case file:\n* was archived,\n* transferred to The National Archives or a local archive (e.g. Glamorgan Archives), or\n* destroyed;\n* including the date of transfer or destruction and the applicable retention policy, where held.\nIf any part of this request is considered exempt under Section 32 of the Act, I ask that HMCTS nonetheless provide **all non-exempt administrative and metadata information** confirming the procedural status of the proceedings and the presence or absence of any final court order.\nI am content to receive the information in electronic format.\nYours faithfully,\nSion Buckler",
   "body_public": null,
   "wdtk_url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133#outgoing-2007260",
   "attachments": []
  },
  {
   "n": 2,
   "wdtk_anchor": "incoming-3289580",
   "direction": "received",
   "date": "2026-01-28T06:45:49+00:00",
   "from": "HM Courts and Tribunals Service (Ministry of Justice)",
   "summary": "Automated receipt from the MoJ Disclosure Team mailbox.",
   "response_class": "acknowledgement only",
   "body": "This is an automated confirmation that your email has been received by the\nDisclosure Team (Ministry of Justice) mailbox. Please be aware, this team\ndeals with a high volume of emails.\nPlease note this email address is for requests for recorded information\nunder the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and non-offender subject\naccess requests under Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA)/General Data\nProtection Regulation (GDPR).\nFreedom of Information requests\nYou can expect a response within 20 working days.\nSubject Access Requests\nYou can expect an initial response within 1 calendar month.\nAny other types of queries/requests, will be handled accordingly.",
   "body_public": "This is an automated confirmation that your email has been received by the\nDisclosure Team (Ministry of Justice) mailbox. Please be aware, this team\ndeals with a high volume of emails.\nPlease note this email address is for requests for recorded information\nunder the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and non-offender subject\naccess requests under Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA)/General Data\nProtection Regulation (GDPR).\nFreedom of Information requests\nYou can expect a response within 20 working days.\nSubject Access Requests\nYou can expect an initial response within 1 calendar month.\nAny other types of queries/requests, will be handled accordingly.",
   "wdtk_url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133#incoming-3289580",
   "attachments": []
  },
  {
   "n": 3,
   "wdtk_anchor": "incoming-3289602",
   "direction": "received",
   "date": "2026-01-28T08:17:11+00:00",
   "from": "HM Courts and Tribunals Service (Ministry of Justice)",
   "summary": "Reply: court records are held by the court for its own purposes; contact the court; if held by the MoJ, likely exempt under s.32.",
   "response_class": "redirected elsewhere (s.32 mentioned)",
   "body": "Morning,\nWe understand that the information you have requested relates to a court or tribunal case. Please contact the relevant court or tribunal directly to request access to these documents under the appropriate Procedure Rules. You can find contact details here:\nhttps://www.gov.uk/find-court-tribunal\n.\nPlease note that the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) gives individuals the right to request recorded information held by public authorities. However, FOIA does not apply to information held by courts and tribunals for the purposes of judicial proceedings. This includes case files, court records, and correspondence relating to judicial decisions.\nIf you would still like us to consider your request under FOIA, please let us know. However, please be aware that the information you have requested is likely not to be held by the MOJ in the first place; this is because court and tribunal records are very often held by a court and tribunal for their own purposes only. It is likely, therefore, that any FOIA outcome from the MOJ will be that we Do Not Hold the data.\nIf such information is held by the MOJ it is likely to be exempt from disclosure under Section 32 of the FOIA, which exempts information from disclosure under the FOIA if it is held by the MOJ only by virtue of it being contained in a court or tribunal record.\nIn either situation, there exists another, more appropriate way to request access court or tribunal records, i.e. through the appropriate Procedure Rules.\nKind regards\nDisclosure Team\nSecurity and Information Directorate\nService Transformation Group\nMinistry of Justice",
   "body_public": "Morning,\nWe understand that the information you have requested relates to a court or tribunal case. Please contact the relevant court or tribunal directly to request access to these documents under the appropriate Procedure Rules. You can find contact details here:\nhttps://www.gov.uk/find-court-tribunal\n.\nPlease note that the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) gives individuals the right to request recorded information held by public authorities. However, FOIA does not apply to information held by courts and tribunals for the purposes of judicial proceedings. This includes case files, court records, and correspondence relating to judicial decisions.\nIf you would still like us to consider your request under FOIA, please let us know. However, please be aware that the information you have requested is likely not to be held by the MOJ in the first place; this is because court and tribunal records are very often held by a court and tribunal for their own purposes only. It is likely, therefore, that any FOIA outcome from the MOJ will be that we Do Not Hold the data.\nIf such information is held by the MOJ it is likely to be exempt from disclosure under Section 32 of the FOIA, which exempts information from disclosure under the FOIA if it is held by the MOJ only by virtue of it being contained in a court or tribunal record.\nIn either situation, there exists another, more appropriate way to request access court or tribunal records, i.e. through the appropriate Procedure Rules.\nKind regards\nDisclosure Team\nSecurity and Information Directorate\nService Transformation Group\nMinistry of Justice",
   "wdtk_url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133#incoming-3289602",
   "attachments": []
  },
  {
   "n": 4,
   "wdtk_anchor": "outgoing-2009242",
   "direction": "sent",
   "date": "2026-02-01T10:19:08+00:00",
   "from": "Requester",
   "summary": "Asks for a formal response under the Act and for administrative records to be treated separately from judicial content.",
   "response_class": "follow-up",
   "body": "Sirs/Ma'am,\nThank you for your email of 28 January 2026 in response to my Freedom of Information request.\nI note your position that the information requested \"is likely not to be held by the MOJ\" and that if held, it is likely exempt under Section 32 of the FOIA. You have also suggested I contact the relevant court directly under the appropriate Procedure Rules.\nI would be grateful if you could address the following points and provide a formal, substantive response to my request under the FOIA:\n1. Clarification of Request Scope & Distinction from Judicial Proceedings:\nMy request was carefully drafted to seek administrative and procedural metadata, not the content of judicial proceedings. I explicitly did not request \"case files, court records, and correspondence relating to judicial decisions\" as characterised in your response. I requested:\nCase numbers (an administrative identifier).\nCourt listing information (an administrative schedule).\nThe administrative status of hearings (e.g., adjourned, withdrawn).\nConfirmation of whether a final order was sealed (a binary yes/no administrative fact).\nCase register/ledger entries showing procedural steps.\nFile retention data (an administrative record).\nThis information relates to the operation and administration of the court, not the judicial decision-making process. It is the type of data that would be recorded in court registers and administrative logs, separate from case files containing evidence and arguments. I therefore ask that you reassess whether Section 32(1) applies to this specific class of administrative record.\n2. Requirement for a Formal Section 32 Refusal Notice:\nIf, after a proper search, HMCTS's position is that all requested information is indeed held \"only by virtue of being contained in a document filed with or created by a court... for the purposes of proceedings\" (s.32(1)(c)), please issue a formal refusal notice under Section 17 of the FOIA.\nThis notice must:\na. State that fact.\nb. Specify the exact subsection of Section 32 you are relying upon (e.g., s.32(1)(a), (b), or (c)).\nc. Explain why that exemption applies to the information requested, addressing the distinction between administrative metadata and judicial records noted above.\n3. Duty to Provide Advice and Assistance (Section 16):\nUnder Section 16 of the FOIA, you have a duty to provide advice and assistance. Your direction to \"contact the relevant court or tribunal directly\" is generic. To fulfil this duty, please provide:\na. The specific contact details for the court record holder for the Cardiff County Court (or relevant South Glamorgan court) for 1974-era records.\nb. A clear reference to the \"appropriate Procedure Rules\" you mention (e.g., the specific part of the Civil Procedure Rules or Practice Direction) that govern access to historical administrative court data of this nature.\nc. Guidance on the precise wording or form such a request to the court should take, given I am seeking administrative metadata rather than case file contents.\n4. Search for Non-Exempt Information & Duty to Confirm or Deny:\nFinally, I remind you of your duty under Section 1(1)(a) of the FOIA to confirm or deny whether you hold the information. Your current response suggests you may not have conducted a search. Please confirm that a search of relevant administrative systems (separate from judicial case files) has been conducted for the requested metadata. Even if some information is exempt under Section 32, other parts (such as current file retention policies for historic records) may not be.\nI look forward to your substantive response within the statutory timeframe.\nRegards,\nSion Buckler",
   "body_public": null,
   "wdtk_url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133#outgoing-2009242",
   "attachments": []
  },
  {
   "n": 5,
   "wdtk_anchor": "incoming-3315104",
   "direction": "received",
   "date": "2026-02-18T16:02:54+00:00",
   "from": "HM Courts and Tribunals Service (Ministry of Justice)",
   "summary": "Request logged as FOI 260201005; response due 27 February 2026.",
   "response_class": "acknowledgement only",
   "body": "Dear Sion Buckler,\nFreedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request – 260201005\nThank you for your request dated 1 February 2026.\nYour request is being handled under the FOIA.\nThe MoJ is required under section 10(1) of the FOIA to provide you with a\nresponse within 20 working days. Therefore, we aim to provide a response\nto your request by 27 February 2026.\nIn the event we can not meet the deadline we will inform you as soon as\npossible.\nYours sincerely\nOperational Support - Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer",
   "body_public": "Dear [requester],\nFreedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request – 260201005\nThank you for your request dated 1 February 2026.\nYour request is being handled under the FOIA.\nThe MoJ is required under section 10(1) of the FOIA to provide you with a\nresponse within 20 working days. Therefore, we aim to provide a response\nto your request by 27 February 2026.\nIn the event we can not meet the deadline we will inform you as soon as\npossible.\nYours sincerely\nOperational Support - Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer",
   "wdtk_url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133#incoming-3315104",
   "attachments": []
  },
  {
   "n": 6,
   "wdtk_anchor": "incoming-3323064",
   "direction": "received",
   "date": "2026-02-26T09:41:36+00:00",
   "from": "HM Courts and Tribunals Service (Ministry of Justice)",
   "summary": "Response FOI 260201005 (letter attached): the MoJ as a public authority holds no information in scope; any records would be court records held by the court.",
   "response_class": "not held",
   "body": "Dear Sion Buckler,\nPlease see the attached response to your request (our reference 260201005)\nRegards\nOperational Support - Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer\nNational Support Unit - HM Courts & Tribunals Service",
   "body_public": "Dear [requester],\nPlease see the attached response to your request (our reference 260201005)\nRegards\nOperational Support - Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer\nNational Support Unit - HM Courts & Tribunals Service",
   "wdtk_url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133#incoming-3323064",
   "attachments": [
    {
     "wb": "WB-0412",
     "title": "HMCTS / MoJ FOI 260201005 response: not held by the MoJ as a public authority (1974 court records)",
     "url": "https://wayback.bucklerfamily.estate/pdf/evidence/2026-02-26_hmcts_foi-260201005-response.pdf",
     "mime": "application/pdf",
     "original_filename": "FOI260201005 Response.pdf",
     "wdtk_url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133/response/3323064/attach/3/FOI260201005%20Response.pdf",
     "note": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "n": 7,
   "wdtk_anchor": "outgoing-2026024",
   "direction": "sent",
   "date": "2026-02-26T15:43:52+00:00",
   "from": "Requester",
   "summary": "Internal review requested under s.17(7).",
   "response_class": "internal review request",
   "body": "NSUKilo,\nThank you for your response dated 26 February 2026 to my FOIA request of 1 February 2026, in which I sought administrative and procedural metadata relating to the civil proceedings in BP Properties Ltd v Buckler (and/or BP Pension Trust Ltd v Buckler) at Cardiff County Court (or the relevant South Glamorgan county court) in 1974.\nI am dissatisfied with the handling of my request and the decision reached, and I am therefore requesting an internal review under Section 17(7) of the FOIA. As outlined in your response, I am submitting this request within the 40-working-day timeframe. My grounds for dissatisfaction are as follows:\nFailure to Confirm or Deny Holding the Information (Section 1(1)(a) FOIA):\nYour response states that the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), acting as a public authority, \"does not hold any information within the scope of [my] request\" because it \"cannot be obtained from the administrative systems held for the public authority purposes\" and is therefore \"not subject to the FOIA.\" However, this appears to conflate the duty to confirm or deny holding information with the application of an exemption.\nUnder Section 1(1)(a), you must first confirm whether the information is held at all, regardless of exemptions. It is unclear from your response whether a search of relevant systems was conducted, or if you are implying that the information is held but only in court records (which you then exempt). Please review whether a proper search was undertaken across all relevant administrative systems, including any non-judicial databases, ledgers, or retention logs that may contain the requested metadata (e.g., case numbers, listing information, hearing status, and file retention data).\nInappropriate Application of Section 32(1) Exemption:\nMy request was explicitly limited to administrative and procedural metadata, such as case numbers, court listing details, hearing status (e.g., adjourned or withdrawn), confirmation of a sealed final order (yes/no), procedural ledger entries, and file retention information. This is distinct from judicial records, case files, or documents containing evidence, arguments, or reasoning. As clarified in ICO guidance on Section 32, the exemption applies absolutely to information held \"only by virtue of being contained in\" court documents created or filed for judicial proceedings. However, administrative metadata—often recorded in separate registers, schedules, or logs for operational purposes—may be held independently and thus fall outside this exemption. Your response does not address this distinction and assumes all requested information is embedded solely in judicial records without evidence of a targeted assessment. Please review whether Section 32 truly applies to this category of data, specifying the exact subsection relied upon (e.g., 32(1)(a), (b), or (c)) and explaining its application to each element of my request. If exempt, a formal refusal notice under Section 17 should be issued, detailing the reasons.\nBreach of Duty to Provide Advice and Assistance (Section 16 FOIA):\nYour suggestion to \"contact the Courts directly\" via the GOV.UK \"Find a Court or Tribunal\" page is overly generic and does not fulfill the duty under Section 16 to offer reasonable, tailored advice. For historical records from 1974 at Cardiff County Court, specific guidance is needed, such as:\nContact details for the custodian of pre-1974-era records (e.g., Glamorgan Archives, which holds county court records for South Glamorgan, including Cardiff).\nReference to applicable rules or directions for accessing administrative metadata (e.g., under the Civil Procedure Rules or relevant Practice Directions for historical data).\nSuggested phrasing or format for a direct request to the court or archive, emphasizing the administrative nature to avoid judicial exemptions.\nPlease review compliance with this duty and provide the necessary assistance.\nPublic Interest and Proportionality:\nAlthough Section 32 is absolute and does not require a public interest test, the overall handling of the request should consider the low sensitivity of the requested metadata for a 50-year-old civil case. There is no apparent prejudice to judicial processes, and disclosure would promote transparency in court administration. If any non-exempt information exists (e.g., general retention policies), it should be provided.\nI would appreciate confirmation of receipt of this internal review request and an estimated timeframe for your response, ideally within 20 working days as recommended by ICO guidance (or up to 40 in complex cases). If the review upholds your original decision, please provide a formal refusal notice as required.\nShould the internal review not resolve this matter, I reserve the right to escalate to the Information Commissioner's Office.\nRegards,\nSion Buckler",
   "body_public": null,
   "wdtk_url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133#outgoing-2026024",
   "attachments": []
  },
  {
   "n": 8,
   "wdtk_anchor": "incoming-3357720",
   "direction": "received",
   "date": "2026-03-26T09:41:06+00:00",
   "from": "HM Courts and Tribunals Service (Ministry of Justice)",
   "summary": "Internal review 260226049 (letter attached): original decision maintained; records selected for preservation would have gone to Glamorgan Archives, the place of deposit for Cardiff County Court records.",
   "response_class": "complaint outcome (not held; redirected to Glamorgan Archives)",
   "body": "Dear Mr Buckler\nPlease see the attached response to your request (our reference 260226049)\nRegards\nOperational Support - Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer\nNational Support Unit | HMCTS\n[1]gov.uk/hmcts\nHM Courts & Tribunals Service logo\n[2]Here is how HMCTS users your data",
   "body_public": "Dear [requester]\nPlease see the attached response to your request (our reference 260226049)\nRegards\nOperational Support - Knowledge and Information Liaison Officer\nNational Support Unit | HMCTS\n[1]gov.uk/hmcts\nHM Courts & Tribunals Service logo\n[2]Here is how HMCTS users your data",
   "wdtk_url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133#incoming-3357720",
   "attachments": [
    {
     "wb": "WB-0414",
     "title": "Email signature logo",
     "url": "https://wayback.bucklerfamily.estate/images/evidence/2026-03-26_hmcts_email-signature-logo-3357720-3.png",
     "mime": "image/png",
     "original_filename": "image001.png",
     "wdtk_url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133/response/3357720/attach/3/image001.png",
     "logo": true
    },
    {
     "wb": "WB-0413",
     "title": "HMCTS internal review 260226049: not held; preserved records would be at Glamorgan Archives",
     "url": "https://wayback.bucklerfamily.estate/pdf/evidence/2026-03-26_hmcts_internal-review-260226049.pdf",
     "mime": "application/pdf",
     "original_filename": "Buckler 260226049 FOI IR response.pdf",
     "wdtk_url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133/response/3357720/attach/4/Buckler%20260226049%20FOI%20IR%20response.pdf",
     "note": null
    }
   ]
  },
  {
   "n": 9,
   "wdtk_anchor": "outgoing-2054713",
   "direction": "sent",
   "date": "2026-04-11T20:00:46+01:00",
   "from": "Requester",
   "summary": "Notes the review outcome; concerns about the search for administrative metadata; considering the ICO.",
   "response_class": "follow-up",
   "body": "Dear HM Courts and Tribunals Service,\nThank you for the outcome of the internal review.\nI note your position that the requested information is treated as held only by the County Court for the court’s purposes and therefore is not held by the Ministry of Justice as a public authority for FOIA purposes.\nI remain concerned that:\nYou have not clearly distinguished between judicial content and administrative metadata (case numbers, cause lists, register entries, and retention data), and\nIt is not clear whether any structured search of relevant HMCTS administrative systems was undertaken before concluding that no information is held for FOIA purposes.\nI will now consider raising this with the Information Commissioner’s Office and will also pursue access to the underlying records via the court and Glamorgan Archives, as you suggest.\nRightfully,\nSion Buckler Esq. (Ret'd A/Sgt)\nExecutor of Manor of Llandough",
   "body_public": null,
   "wdtk_url": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133#outgoing-2054713",
   "attachments": []
  }
 ],
 "archived": "2026-10-21",
 "statement": "",
 "site": "https://whatdotheyknow.bucklerfamily.estate/r/freedom_of_information_request_a_2133/",
 "thread_json": "https://wayback.bucklerfamily.estate/text/evidence/wdtk/2026-01-28_wdtk-hmcts_freedom-of-information-request-a-2133.json"
}