Nisaa Mohedin Hawa v Information Commissioner

1. On 7 April 2025, the Appellant made an application on GRC1 asking this Tribunal to review the Respondent’s decision not to require Wales Online to remove news articles regarding another individual. That application referred to the GDPR.

2. On 7 May 2025, the Appellant made an application on GRC5 in which they confirmed that the appeal relates to the erasure of personal data under GDPR and was not a Freedom of Information Act matter.

3. On 4 November 2025, Judge Kiai directed the Appellant to make written submissions by 19 November 2025 explaining how the Appellant has standing to bring the appeal and how the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the appeal. In that order, Judge Kiai warned the Appellant that failure to comply could lead to the Tribunal striking out the appeal under Rule 8(3)(a) or (b) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009.

4. The Appellant has to date not made any written submissions.

5. Rule 8(2)(a) provides that the Tribunal must strike out proceedings if the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction. Rule 8(3)(c) provides that the Tribunal may strike out proceedings if it considers that they have no reasonable prospect of success. Rule 8(4) confirms that the Tribunal may not strike out under either provision without first giving the appellant an opportunity to make representations in relation to the proposed striking out.

6. Whilst it does not appear that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the appeal or that it has reasonable prospect of success, I cannot strike out the claim under either provision because the Appellant has not been given notice under Rule 8(4).

7. However, the Appellant was given notice pursuant to Rule 8(3)(a) that failure to provide written submissions could lead to strike out. The Appellant has not provided those written submissions. It is now over two weeks since the deadline to do so expired. The appeal should therefore be struck out. Signed Date: 9 December 2025 Judge Taft