Case: Pending Anthony Org v. Ministry of Justice (2026) CV 03
- Thread starter Anthony_org
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2024
- Messages
- 225
Motion to Dismiss
Thank you, Your Honor. Unfortunately, I must request a dismissal of this case. As I outlined in my opening statement, and as Your Honor can see from the Plaintiff's complaint, the Plaintiff is not alleging the Defendant withheld information. The Defendant is required to disclose if classified information exists relevant to the FOI request but cannot be shared. The Defendant has repeatedly attested in this court that there is no such information. The Plaintiff does not claim such information exists, nor have they provided evidence to substantiate any such concern.
The Defendant also responded to the Plaintiff's FOI request within 7 days. That is addressing the request in a timely manner. The only claim the Plaintiff is suing on is that the Defendant did not clarify whether records were searched, whether classified records exist, and whether such classified records were redacted and not provided.
This is simply not sufficient under the Freedom of Information Act, Section 5a. All of the Plaintiff's complaints are inherently answered by the response. Yes, records were searched. That's why there's a response. No, there are not classified records or redactions to provide. That is why there was no classification level stated in the response.
The Government is not claiming a specific piece of information cannot be shared. That is one of the two causes of action established in Section 5a, and that is not the grounds of this lawsuit. The Plaintiff claims "wasted time" as a small part of their complaint, but the Plaintiff received a response within a week, and did nothing to indicate to the Defendant they wished for additional information. An individual receiving a response within a week, not following up, and then claiming the Ministry wasted time, does not meet the idea that the Government is not handling a request in a timely manner.
As such, these are the only two causes of action provided by the law. The Plaintiff does not have the right to sue simply to request judicial review. The Plaintiff is not suing over or alleging that information was withheld. And the Plaintiff's allegation of wasted time is clearly disproven and unsubstantiated, based on the screenshot submitted by the Plaintiff.
Therefore, Your Honor, we respectfully request dismissal, as the Plaintiff's lawsuit does not meet a proper cause of action.
Thank you, Your Honor. Unfortunately, I must request a dismissal of this case. As I outlined in my opening statement, and as Your Honor can see from the Plaintiff's complaint, the Plaintiff is not alleging the Defendant withheld information. The Defendant is required to disclose if classified information exists relevant to the FOI request but cannot be shared. The Defendant has repeatedly attested in this court that there is no such information. The Plaintiff does not claim such information exists, nor have they provided evidence to substantiate any such concern.
The Defendant also responded to the Plaintiff's FOI request within 7 days. That is addressing the request in a timely manner. The only claim the Plaintiff is suing on is that the Defendant did not clarify whether records were searched, whether classified records exist, and whether such classified records were redacted and not provided.
This is simply not sufficient under the Freedom of Information Act, Section 5a. All of the Plaintiff's complaints are inherently answered by the response. Yes, records were searched. That's why there's a response. No, there are not classified records or redactions to provide. That is why there was no classification level stated in the response.
The Government is not claiming a specific piece of information cannot be shared. That is one of the two causes of action established in Section 5a, and that is not the grounds of this lawsuit. The Plaintiff claims "wasted time" as a small part of their complaint, but the Plaintiff received a response within a week, and did nothing to indicate to the Defendant they wished for additional information. An individual receiving a response within a week, not following up, and then claiming the Ministry wasted time, does not meet the idea that the Government is not handling a request in a timely manner.
As such, these are the only two causes of action provided by the law. The Plaintiff does not have the right to sue simply to request judicial review. The Plaintiff is not suing over or alleging that information was withheld. And the Plaintiff's allegation of wasted time is clearly disproven and unsubstantiated, based on the screenshot submitted by the Plaintiff.
Therefore, Your Honor, we respectfully request dismissal, as the Plaintiff's lawsuit does not meet a proper cause of action.