Bjoern-Victor Norgren v The Information Commissioner & Anor

Facts

On 1 March 2024 the appellant, Mr Bjoern-Victor Norgren, wrote to the National Police Chiefs' Council with four questions. He asked what percentage of the security and surveillance cameras used by UK police originated in China, and how that had changed between 2021 and 2024. He asked what steps had been taken to end reliance on Chinese imports ("Project Defend"), whether UK police had increased their sourcing of UK, EU or US-manufactured cameras, and what steps were being taken to stop sourcing Hikvision, Dahua and Huawei products. The Authority replied on 19 March 2024 that it did not hold the information. It upheld that position on internal review on 27 March 2024, and the appellant complained to the Information Commissioner the same day. During the Commissioner's investigation, on 21 June 2024, the Authority revised its response and relied instead on section 12(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. It said that no central function captured the information and that finding out whether it was held would require exhaustive searches taking more than 18 hours. The appellant pursued his complaint on national security and public interest grounds. By a Decision Notice dated 10 July 2024 the Commissioner accepted the Authority's estimate as reasonable and found that the request could not meaningfully be refined. He also held that the Authority had complied with section 16 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, and required no steps to be taken. The appellant appealed to the First-tier Tribunal on the grounds that the public interest was significant and the cost argument was invalid. The appeal was heard by video on 5 June 2026. The Commissioner did not appear.