[黑特] 英國高等法院：FOIA不適用蔡英文論文

資訊來自Richardson的部落格

https://richardsonreports.wordpress.com/2022/10/19/upper-tribunal-judge-edward-jacobs-rules-tsai-ing-wen-thesis-controversy-cannot-be-resolved-by-freedom-of-information-law/

英國Upper Tribunal的法官Edward Jacobs駁回一項引用FOIA（資訊自由法）來討論。

判決認定FOIA並不適用此案件。

文中還有提到：

President Tsai’s name is on the contemporaneous pass list for in 1984 and the title of her thesis was published
in 1985. The University had confirmed that there was an oral examination and
that it holds records of that examination. The tribunal decided that this was sufficient to satisfy the legitimate interests of [Appellant].”

‘’蔡總統的名字有出現在1984年的通過名單，其論文標題有出現在1985年的出版物上。
大學已經確認有口試，也證實他們持有口試紀錄。
本庭認為這些已足以滿足上訴人的法益。

“The request was made to the University of London. The important word there is ‘University’. The request was not made to any of the constituent colleges ofthe University and did not relate to information held by any of the colleges. In particular, the duty did not apply to
the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), which was
the relevant college.”

這邊則是澄清LSE沒有責任回應這項針對倫敦大學的要求。

文章還有提到為何FOIA不適用此案件。

總之上訴庭再度確認倫敦大學持有口試資料喔呵呵。

彭P剛募款五百萬要告LSE的樣子？
※ 每日發文數上限為5篇，自刪與板主刪除，同樣計入額度 ※
※ 發文 內文請滿40字 ※
------以上看完可使用 Ctrl+y 刪除------

-----
Sent from JPTT on my Samsung SM-A217F.

--

“The tribunal found that, although the theses may not have been provided to the libraries rather than lost or misfiled, that did not undermine the accuracy of the information about the degree awarded. That was a matter of judgment. I can see no error of law in the conclusion or in the way it was made.ꠊ 英國高等法院確認，論文有無妥善收入圖書館這點，不影響該學位的正式授予。