Local voter and environmental campaigner, Shlomo Dowen, already has his hands on details of the company's 2007 contract with the council – along with a sheaf of invoices and other documents – and a top judge said today (October 29) that was now “water under the bridge”.
In a ruling which set down guidelines on the privacy rights of companies that contract with public authorities, Lord Justice Rix said Veolia had a right under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to protect confidential details of the Nottinghamshire contract.
Although it said it could “live with” Mr Dowen having possession of documents already disclosed to him by the council, it said disclosure of information about its business model and profit margins threatened to cause “very considerable harm” to the company.
Lord Justice Rix backed Veolia's stance when he said there was a “strong public interest in the maintenance of valuable commercial information” and that was capable of overriding Mr Dowen's rights of inspection under the Audit Commission Act 1998.
The confidential information was a private “possession” protected by the ECHR under which Veolia has the same privacy rights as an individual.
The judge also said his “provisional view” was that documents and invoices disclosed in full to Mr Dowen after a High Court ruling last year (see letsrecycle.com story) should have been “redacted” to remove confidential information – although that was now “water under the bridge”.
Details
But he added that he could “at present see no reason” why further details about Veolia's business model and profit margins should also now be disclosed to Mr Dowen, who is a member of the action group ‘People Against Incineration'.
Lord Justice Rix also expressed the view that the information Mr Dowen has so far obtained should be treated as “confidential in his hands” and only used to exercise his right as a voter to question or object to the council's audited accounts.
However, on that issue, Lord Justice Etherton and Lord Justice Jackson disagreed with him and declined to rule on the use Mr Dowen may make of the information he has.
Further litigation
Unless a compromise can be reached, that question may well be the source of yet further litigation in a case which has already run up enormous legal costs bills.
Philip Coppel QC, for Veolia ES Nottinghamshire Ltd, earlier said that the confidential information at the heart of the case is of “high commercial value” and the company had “devoted much time, money and effort” to acquiring it.
Nottinghamshire said it was obliged to honour Mr Dowen's disclosure request under 1998 Act, which gives local government electors the right to object to items in their authority's accounts when they come up for inspection by auditors to ensure they are getting value for money.
But Veolia has always complained that disclosure of unredacted details of its contract with the council, and invoices indicating how much it charged for its services, breached its right to confidentiality and seriously damage its ability to compete with other contractors.
Subscribe for free