A local authority is to defy a ruling that it must release the names of four tax-avoiding councillors to a regional daily.

Leeds City Council has been told by the Information Commissioner to release the names of its members who have been sent a court summons over unpaid council tax to the Yorkshire Post.

But the defiant council is instead set to challenge the ICO’s decision, having paid £1,200 for external legal advice – with a further estimated £3,500 earmarked for further legal costs.

The Post had initially submitted a Freedom of Information request to the authority, and others across Yorkshire, which was subsequently refused.

The council chamber at Leeds Civic Hall

Sheffield City Council also refused an initial request by the newspaper, but backed down after the Post’s appeal to the ICO.

Leeds also refused to say if there were any other councillors who had been summonsed to court who had paid up before a hearing but, as a result of the appeal and subsequent ruling, it has emerged there are a further four councillors in that position, who the council are refusing to identify.

The council was also required to disclose more details of those councillors who had received liability orders, bar one who had suffered a bereavement whose details the appeal acknowledged were likely to be withheld.

A Post editorial reads: “Thanks to the advent of Freedom of Information laws, public sector bodies accept the need to be open, transparent and accountable to taxpayers over their probity.

“It’s why town halls don’t now quibble when asked to confirm the council tax status of elected councillors, the people who make spending decisions on behalf of voters.”

It continues: “As such, Leeds Council chief executive Tom Riordan is duty-bound to order full disclosure before his authority risks even more opprobrium.

“Even though his officials maintain that the cases concerned only involve one monthly instalment being accidentally missed, a summons is only issued as a last resort after at least one reminder has been sent out.

“As this botched cover-up makes matters even worse than necessary, it is only right that the electorate should be the final arbiters.”

A council spokeswoman said: “The fact the Information Commissioner upheld our decision in one case justifies that challenge. The decision to go to tribunal was based on the specifics of these cases and after taking proper, independent advice.

“We certainly do not encourage missing council tax payments but we felt there were mitigating circumstances. These were that in all cases one installment had been accidentally missed, reasonable explanations were given as to why and all outstanding debts were immediately paid.”