29 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about non-domestic business rates. Ribble Valley Borough Council (the “council”) refused the request, citing the exemption for information provided in confidence (section 41).The Commissioner’s decision is that is that the council was correct to apply section 41(1) to withhold the information from disclosure. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41
View Ribble Valley Borough Council
29 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about non-domestic business rates. Erewash Borough Council (the “council”) refused the request, citing the exemption for information provided in confidence (section 41).The Commissioner’s decision is that is that the council was correct to apply section 41(1) to withhold the information from disclosure. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41
View Erewash Borough Council
29 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from the London Borough of Havering (the Council), the make and model of a CCTV camera at a specified location. The Council told the complainant that it doesn’t hold the information. However, during the Commissioner’s investigation, the Council’s position changed. The Council is now relying on section 43(2) of FOIA (the commercial interests exemption) to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has failed to demonstrate that section 43(2) is engaged, and that consequently the Council isn’t entitled to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner therefore requires the Council to disclose the requested information, to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View London Borough of Havering
29 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, Kent Community Health NHS Foundation Trust (‘the Trust’) doesn’t hold the requested information associated with a contract awarded to Psicon. The Trust breached section 1(1)(a) and section 10(1) however, as it didn’t confirm it doesn’t hold some of the information within the statutory timeframe. It’s not necessary for the Trust to take any corrective steps. Information Tribunal FTT FT/EA/2024/0071 appeal withdrawn.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Kent Community Health NHS Foundation Trust
29 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Chief Constable of Kent Police relating to non-crime hate incidents. Kent Police refused to confirm or deny whether it held information within the scope of the request, citing section 12(2) (cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Kent Police was entitled to apply section 12(2) of FOIA. He is also satisfied that Kent Police met its obligation under section 16 to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require Kent Police to take any further action.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(2); FOI 16
View Kent Police
29 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested staffing and disciplinary information. The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified under FOIA. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 35 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Surrey Police
29 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has submitted a request to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) seeking copies of telegrams between then FCO and the UK Embassy in Bahrain dating from 2002 concerning the Duke of York’s visit to Bahrain. The FCDO responded by stating that it did not hold any information. The complainant disputed this and argued that the FCDO should have provided him with advice and assistance, under section 16 of FOIA, to assist him in accessing the information he wanted. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities the FCDO does not hold any information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner has also concluded that the FCDO were not under a section 16 duty to offer advice and assistance in response to this request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 16
View Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
29 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from the London Borough of Southwark Council (“the Council”), in relation to the 2018 Movement Plan. The Council advised that it does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is environmental information within the definition at regulation 2(1)(c) of the EIR. The request therefore should have been handled under the EIR. However, he still finds on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require any steps as a result of this Decision Notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
View Southwark Council
29 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about non-domestic business rates. Burnley Borough Council (the “council”) refused the request, citing the exemptions for law enforcement (section 31) and information provided in confidence (section 41). The Commissioner’s decision is that is that the council was correct to apply section 41(1) to withhold the information from disclosure. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41
View Burnley Borough Council
29 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about non-domestic business rates. Bristol City Council (the “council”) refused the request, citing the exemption for information provided in confidence (section 41). The Commissioner’s decision is that is that the council was correct to apply section 41(1) to withhold the information from disclosure. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41
View Bristol City Council
29 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information related to the income tax personal allowance taper. HM Treasury (“HMT”) refused to provide it citing section 35(1)(a) (formulation/development of government policy) as its basis for doing so. It upheld this at internal review. The Commissioner’s decision is that HMT is entitled to rely on section 35(1)(a) as its basis for withholding the requested information. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal EA/2024/0049 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35
View HM Treasury
29 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about non-domestic business rates. Manchester City Council (the “council”) refused the request, citing the exemptions for law enforcement (section 31), commercial interests (section 43(2) and information provided in confidence (section 41).The Commissioner’s decision is that is that the council was correct to apply section 41(1) to withhold the information from disclosure. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41
View Manchester City Council
29 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Chief Constable of Sussex Police (the public authority). By the date of this notice the public authority had not issued a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has breached section 10(1) of FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request it has identified as FOI-12433-23-4700-000, in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The public authority must take this step within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Sussex Police
29 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Ministry of Defence (MOD) seeking a copy of his late father’s service record. The MOD refused the request on the basis of section 14(2) (repeated requests) as it had previously responded to an earlier such request and stated no information was held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOD are entitled to refuse the request on the basis of section 14(2) of FOIA. Information Tribunal EA/2024/0040 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(2)
View Ministry of Defence
29 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, Kent Community Health NHS Foundation Trust (‘the Trust’) doesn’t hold further recorded information about adult autism assessments and has complied with section 1(1) and section 10(1) of FOIA. It’s not necessary for the Trust to take any corrective steps. Information Tribunal FTT FT/EA/2024/0072 appeal withdrawn.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Kent Community Health NHS Foundation Trust
27 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The Commissioner’s decision is that Transport for London is entitled to withhold the requested information about particular traffic cameras under regulation 12(5)(a) and regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. These exceptions concern public safety and the course of justice. No corrective steps are necessary. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0058 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(a); EIR 12(5)(b)
View Transport for London
27 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The Commissioner’s decision is that Transport for London is entitled to withhold the requested information about a particular traffic camera under regulation 12(5)(a) and regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. These exceptions concern public safety and the course of justice. No corrective steps are necessary. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0050 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(a); EIR 12(5)(b)
View Transport for London
27 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The Commissioner’s decision is that Transport for London is entitled to withhold the requested information about a particular traffic camera under regulation 12(5)(a) and regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. These exceptions concern public safety and the course of justice. No corrective steps are necessary. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0053 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(a); EIR 12(5)(b)
View Transport for London
27 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The Commissioner’s decision is that Transport for London is entitled to withhold the requested information about a particular traffic camera under regulation 12(5)(a) and regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. These exceptions concern public safety and the course of justice. No corrective steps are necessary. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0054 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(a); EIR 12(5)(b)
View Transport for London
26 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council (the Council), information about public health funerals from 2018 onwards, specifically the names and other information relating to the deceased people and their estates. The Council provided the complainant with a link to information it publishes online about public health funerals, and (at internal review stage) explained it holds information about two cases within scope of the request. However it withheld the requested names, dates of birth, last known addresses and estimated estate values, citing section 31 of FOIA (the law enforcement exemption) as its basis for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was correct to rely on section 31 of FOIA. The Commissioner doesn’t require any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Blackburn with Darwen Council
26 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the University of Central Lancashire (“the University”) in relation to communications between a specific Professor and the Queen’s University Belfast (“QUB”). The University advised that it does not hold the requested information for the purposes of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the information sought by the complainant is not held by the University for the purposes of FOIA and that the University is entitled to rely on section 3(2)(a) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps as a result of this decision notice. Information Tribunal FTT FT/EA/2024/0069 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
26 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Conwy County Borough Council (the public authority). By the date of this notice the public authority had not issued a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has breached section 10(1) of FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The public authority must take this step within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Conwy County Borough Council
26 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Sussex Police (the public authority). By the date of this notice the public authority had not issued a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has breached section 10(1) of FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The public authority must take this step within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Sussex Police
26 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Sussex Police (the public authority). By the date of this notice the public authority had not issued a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has breached section 10(1) of FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.The public authority must take this step within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Sussex Police
25 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from NHS England information about the cost of its review into North East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust. NHS England responded to the request and provided answers to all of the questions asked. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, NHS England has identified and provided all the information within the scope of the request. NHS England has complied with section 1(1) and 10(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1); FOI 10(1)
View NHS England
25 Jan 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the number of employees who have been formally or informally disciplined due to sickness absence every month for a period of five years. Oxford City Council refused the request under section 12(1) (cost of compliance) but provided the information it was able to provide within the cost limit under the duty to provide advice and assistance (section 16). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to refuse to comply with the request under section 12(1) and has complied with the requirement of section 16. However the Council breached section 17(1) by issuing a refusal notice outside the statutory time period. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16; FOI 17
View Oxford City Council
25 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about dropped kerb applications. Newport City Council (the Council) provided some information but withheld information about a specific application under section 40(2) (third party personal data) of the FOIA. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the Council agreed that the request falls to be considered under the EIR as opposed to the FOIA and sought to rely on regulation 13 (third party personal data) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly relied on regulation 13 to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 13
View Newport City Council
25 Jan 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant asked for information about recent nominations for ‘blue plaques’ received by English Heritage. English Heritage disclosed some information, but it refused to disclose the list of nominations received, citing sections 36(2)(b)(ii) and 36(2)(c) (Prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs) of FOIA. It said that the withheld information would be published at a future date, when a final decision on each blue plaque nomination had been made. The Commissioner’s decision is that English Heritage was entitled to rely on sections 36(2)(b)(ii) and 36(2)(c) of FOIA to refuse to disclose the information. However, it breached sections 1 (General right of access) and 10 (Time for compliance) of FOIA, by failing to respond to the request within the statutory time for compliance.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 36
View English Heritage
24 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Ofcom relating to any datasets it holds containing dates of birth, ages, postcodes and or dates of incorporation. Ofcom refused to comply with the request citing section 12 of FOIA (cost limit).The Commissioner’s decision is that Ofcom was entitled to refuse to comply with the request in accordance with section 12(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner also finds that Ofcom complied with its obligations under section 16 to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require Ofcom to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Ofcom
24 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the University of Oxford (“the University”) relating to assets owned by the University. The University refused to comply with the request citing section 12 of FOIA (cost limit).The Commissioner’s decision is that the University was entitled to refuse to comply with the request in accordance with section 12(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner also finds that the University complied with its obligations under section 16 to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require the University to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View The University of Oxford
24 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding two misconduct hearings. The Derbyshire Constabulary (‘the Constabulary’) relied on section 40(2) of FOIA (third party personal information) to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has correctly relied on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
24 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested background information relating to a standards committee hearing from Devon County Council (‘the council’). The council refused to provide the information, citing section 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) and section 40(2) (personal data) of FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to withhold the information under sections 36(2)(b) and section 40(2). The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0061 appeal part allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36(2)(b); FOI 40(2)
View Devon County Council
24 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to a specific farm. The Environment Agency (“the public authority”) refused to confirm or deny whether the information is held, citing regulation 13(5)(a) (personal information) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that regulation 13(5)(a) has been applied correctly. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13(5a)
View Environment Agency
24 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified in the EIR. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 35 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust
24 Jan 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Warwick District Council (the Council). By the date of this notice the public authority had not issued a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the questions at part 1, part 2 and part 3(1) are not valid requests for recorded information. The Council is not required to take any further action regarding these questions. The Commissioner also finds that the Council has breached section 10(1) of FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the remaining parts of the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Council must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The Council must take this step within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certificat
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 8
View Warwick District Council
23 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to complaints. The Driver and Vehicle License Agency (“the public authority”) disclosed information in response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the public authority has disclosed all information that falls within the scope of the request and complied with section 1 (general right of access) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
23 Jan 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the Government guidance: ‘Coronavirus (COVID-19): admission and care of people in care homes.’ The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) is withholding 35 documents under section 36(2)(b) and 36(2)(c) of FOIA. These exemptions concern the effective conduct of public affairs. DHSC disclosed other information with information redacted under section 40(2) and 35(1)(d) as well as the section 36 exemptions. Those two exemptions concern the formulation of government policy and personal data. The scope of the complaint to the Commissioner is DHSC’s application of section 36 to the 35 documents being withheld in their entirety. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: At the time of the request, DHSC was correct to rely on section 36(2)(b)(i), section 36(2)(b)(ii) and section 36(2)(c) of FOIA to withhold 35 of the documents that fall within scope of the complainant’s request. The public interest favoured maintaining these exemptions. DHSC
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 17; FOI 36
View Department of Health and Social Care
23 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the Second Permanent Secretary’s investigations into staff gatherings at No 10. Downing Street on four separate dates. The Cabinet Office initially stated that was exempting information it held within scope of the request with reliance on section 31(1)(law enforcement), section 40(2)(personal information) and section 41(1)(information provided in confidence) of FOIA. At internal review, the Cabinet Office amended its position and sought to rely on section 12(1) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office is entitled to rely on section 12(1) to refuse the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1)
View Cabinet Office
23 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) relating to visits made by Boris Johnson to Ukraine, both as Prime Minister and ex-Prime Minister. The FCDO refused to comply with the request citing section 12(1) (cost limit) of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that the FCDO was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse to comply with the request. The Commissioner also finds that the FCDO complied with its obligations under section 16 to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require the FCDO to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1)
View Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
22 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the way the above public authority delivers its religious education curriculum. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
22 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Queen’s University Belfast (the University) information regarding UCEA Code for Participating Employers. The University refused the request and cited sections 36(2)(b)(i) and 36(2)(c) (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that the withheld information engages section 36(2)(c) of FOIA and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require the University to take any steps as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0063 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36(2)(c)
View Queen's University Belfast
22 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the way the above public authority delivers its religious education curriculum. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
22 Jan 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Cabinet Office for information relating to when each of the communications, referenced in the Sue Gray report, were discovered, and then presented to former Prime Minister Boris Johnson.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office correctly applied section 21 (information accessible by other means) of FOIA to the information requested. However, in failing to respond to the request and issue a refusal notice within twenty working days, the Commissioner has found a breach of sections 10(1), 17(1) and 17(3) of FOIA.The Commissioner does not require further steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 17; FOI 17(3); FOI 21
View Cabinet Office
22 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the way the above public authority delivers its religious education curriculum. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
22 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the way the above public authority delivers its religious education curriculum. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
22 Jan 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested Defra to disclose records of conversations conducted between 5 September 2022 and 7 February 2023 where there is discussion about reducing the planned scale of future domestic biomass supply for electricity generation. Defra refused to disclose the requested information citing regulation 12(4)(e) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that Defra is entitled to refuse to disclose the requested information in accordance with regulation 12(4)(e) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e)
22 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the way the above public authority delivers its religious education curriculum. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
22 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the way the above public authority delivers its religious education curriculum. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
22 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the way the above public authority delivers its religious education curriculum. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
22 Jan 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority breached section 17(3) of FOIA by failing to complete its public interest test considerations within a reasonable time. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17(3)
View Home Office