Application of OIA to information about summoning and empanelling of jury—capacity in which Court Registrar held information—information held by the Court—information not subject to OIA
A requester wrote to the Department for Courts requesting information relating to how the jury panel was summoned for a particular trial.
In its response the Department advised the requester that the jury panel had been summoned in accordance with the method prescribed by the Jury Rules 1990. It also referred to section 9(6) of the Juries Act 1981 and advised it was unable to provide any documentation relating to the empanelling of the jury because it was part of the Court file. The requester was advised that any request for documentation held by the Court must be made to the Registrar together with reasons why the documentation is required.
The Department’s decision was reviewed under the OIA and, in its report, it referred to the fact that summoning jurors and empanelling juries are two different procedures. The procedure for summoning jurors is undertaken by the Registrar of a Court. The Registrar randomly selects the names of a certain number of persons from the jury list, which is compiled once a year by the Chief Registrar of Electors, and sends a summons to each informing them that they have been summoned to attend as jurors for a particular week. The process involves the selection of cards from a revolving barrel in the manner prescribed by the Jury Rules and the only documentation held by a court in relation to the summoning process is the jury list. In this case the Court also held a list of the prospective jurors for the relevant week and other related correspondence and information.
Empanelling, on the other hand, is the process by which a jury for a particular trial is selected from the prospective jurors summoned to appear at a Court on a particular day. Documentation relating to the empanelling of a jury is part of the Court file relating to a particular trial.
The issue for consideration was whether the information at issue was subject to the OIA. Section 2(1) of the OIA defines ‘official information’ as:
(a) ... any information held by—
(i) a department; or
(ii) a Minister of the Crown in his official capacity; or
(iii) an organisation.
Section 2(6)(a) of the Act provides that:
(6) For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby declared that the terms department and organisation do not include—
(a) a court.
Accordingly, information held by a Court is not subject to the OIA.
In this case the information at issue was held by the Registrar of the Court. In some circumstances, information held by the Registrar of a Court is held in his or her administrative role as an employee of the Department for Courts and is therefore subject to the OIA. However, a Registrar’s role is not solely administrative; a Registrar as an officer of the Court also has numerous quasi-judicial statutory responsibilities which require the exercise of the Registrar’s discretion.
Having regard to the duties, role, and functions of a Registrar in relation to the summoning and empanelling of a jury under the Juries Act 1981 and the Jury Rules 1990, it seemed clear that the Registrar held the information at issue as an officer of the Court and not as an employee of the Department for Courts. As a consequence the information on the summoning and empanelling of a jury was held by the Court not by the Department for Courts and it was not therefore accessible under the OIA.
This case note is published under the authority of the Ombudsmen Rules 1989 opens page in this tab. It sets out an Ombudsman’s view on the facts of a particular case. It should not be taken as establishing any legal precedent that would bind an Ombudsman in future.