A former regional daily journalist has lost his 18-month fight to make a council reveal how the owners of a tourist attraction on his old patch intend to pay back a £36m government loan.

John Keenan, left, who used to serve as business editor at Brighton daily The Argus, had spent the past year-and-a-half locked in a Freedom of Information battle with Brighton & Hove Council, which had refused to release the full details of a business case used to justify a loan used to help build the i360 – the world’s tallest moving observation tower.

But, despite the Information Commissioner ruling the case should be made publicly available, a crown court judge has now sided with the authority over the issue – meaning taxpayers may never find out how the attraction’s owner Brighton i360 Ltd intends to pay the cash back.

The council spent £36,000 of public money opposing the release of the document, which would have revealed how much the attraction hopes to make from admissions, merchandise and drinks sales over its first ten years.

In his ruling, Judge David Farrer QC, said competitors would “exploit” the information to the detriment of the i360 and “pre-empt” its initiatives.

But freelance journalist John, who worked at The Argus between 2010 and 2014, has told his former employer the decision was a blow to “transparency and accountability”.

The loan from the government is from the Public Works Loan Board, which was set up for local authorities to fund projects with commercial returns without using council tax funds.

When applying for planning permission, it had been claimed the i360 would be an “entirely new attraction” which would not compete with existing tourist attractions.

The council argued disclosure of the information would allow competitors to adjust their ticket, merchandise and catering prices to compete more successfully with the i360.

The authority also claimed it would prejudice the council’s own commercial interests because weakening the i360’s competitive position could affect its ability to maintain repayments.

Said John: “The decision is a blow to those who believe the rise of the ‘entrepreneurial council’ requires transparency and accountability.

“We must hope in this instance that the council has done its sums properly.”