Recurrent: ADIF/Ministry of Transport and Sustainable Mobility

Resolution appealed: R CTBG 1486/2025

In exercise of the right of access to public information, ADIF/MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT AND SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY was requested to access data on the management, incidents and quality of service of the Madrid Suburbs network.

ADIF issued an express ruling in time inadmissing the request by stating that the request was not public information but a complete audit report at the request of an individual. In addition, he argued that, due to the magnitude and scope of the request, it was not a matter of existing public information, which implied an act constituting abuse of rights - ex article 18.1.e) LTAIBG - both from a qualitative and quantitative point of view, since it involved a disproportionate workload for the unit responsible for transparency. It also claimed, on a subsidiary basis, that it was also involved in the case of inadmissibility of Article 18.1.c) LTAIBG, which involved complex reworking.

The Council considers the complaint by pointing out that the justification given for the refusal of the information requested as abusive is insufficient and inappropriate for the inadmissibility for this reason, since, in addition to being unrelated to the circumstances of the specific case, the obligatory proportionality judgment has not been carried out, which makes it possible to assess the possibility of partial access to the information requested. The data on the volume of the information requested, although significant, does not constitute an element that allows the requested entity to maintain the abusive nature of the request, in its quantitative dimension, since, precisely, Article 20.1, second paragraph LTAIBG allows, when the volume or complexity of the information makes it necessary, an extension of the deadline for resolution, a measure that was not adopted.

Nor can the argument put forward by ADIF about the particular interest of the applicant in obtaining the information be successful. In this regard, it should be recalled that article 17.3 of the LTAIBG provides that the applicant is not obliged to motivate his application. However, it should be pointed out that the information requested is of undoubted public interest, since it allows for objective information that makes it possible to assess the public management carried out in this area.

Finally, the application of the cause of inadmissibility of article 18.1.c) LTAIBG is not considered justified, taking into account, in addition, the limitation made by the claimant, during the proceedings, to the scope, content and temporal extension of the object of the claim.