IC-265759-D6Q2: Three Rivers District Council
The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority breached section 10(1) of FOIA by failing to provide a response within 20 working days.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1)
Source · FOI / EIR decision notices
ICO FOI/EIR Decision Notices
Freedom of Information and Environmental Information Regulations decisions by the Information Commissioner.
26,238 total decisions
8,733 upheld (must disclose)
1,340 bodies covered
2005–2026 indexed date range
Filter decisions
IC-269610-Q3G8: NHS England
The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority breached section 10(1) of FOIA by failing to provide a response within 20 working days.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1)
IC-262127-Y7T8: Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
The complainant has requested minutes of New Hospital Committee Meetings from Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). The Trust redacted some of the information contained within the minutes, citing regulation 12(5)(b) (disclosure would adversely affect the course of justice) and regulation 13 (personal data) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust is entitled to withhold the redacted information under regulations 12(5)(b) and 13 of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require the Trust to take further steps in relation to this request. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/0512 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 13
IC-261702-D6H4: Department of Health and Social Care
The public authority has failed to complete its public interest test considerations within a reasonable time in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The Commissioner requires it to provide a substantive response to the request within 35 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1)
IC-247111-J3R3: Financial Ombudsman Service
The complainant has requested information from the Financial Ombudsman Service (“the public authority”) regarding processes and rules used for specific complaints or requests. The public authority provided some information in relation to the request, however, it denied holding any further information. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, the public authority does not hold any further information in relation to the request and as such, the public authority has complied with its obligations under section 1(1) of FOIA. However, the Commissioner finds that the public authority breached section 10 of FOIA, as it provided information outside of the 20 working day timeframe. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1); FOI 10(1)
IC-250643-N4Q5: Lancashire Constabulary
The complainant has requested a written copy of a judgment from a civil court matter. Lancashire Constabulary cited section 40(5B)(a)(i) (personal information) of FOIA to neither confirm nor deny that it holds the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Constabulary was entitled to rely on section 40(5B)(a)(i) of FOIA to neither confirm nor deny that it holds the requested information. However, the Commissioner finds that the Constabulary breached section 17(1) of FOIA as it failed to issue a refusal notice within the statutory 20 working days.The Commissioner does not require the Constabulary to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 40(5)(b)(a)(i)
IC-219991-T8C5: Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
The complainant submitted a request to Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS) seeking copies of correspondence it had exchanged with Nominet during February, March and April 2022. DCMS confirmed that it held information falling within the scope of the request but sought to withhold this on the basis of section 36(2)(c) (effective conduct of public affairs) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 36(2)(c) is not engaged.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36(2)(c)
IC-244702-D9T4: Lincolnshire County Council
The complainant has requested from Lincolnshire County Council (LCC) all documentation (both internal and external) related to the updating of the Lincolnshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan between 10 November 2022 and 6 April 2023. LCC confirmed that it held the information requested for parts 1 and 2 of the request but refused to disclose it citing its reliance on EIR regulation 12(4)(d) of the EIR - Material in the course of completion, unfinished documents and incomplete data - as its basis for doing so. LCC also cited its reliance on regulation 12(5)(a) - Information not held - for the remainder of the request (part 3). The Commissioner’s decision is that LCC has correctly applied regulation 12(4)(d) of EIR to parts 1 and 2 of the request, and that on the balance of probabilities, LCC does not hold the information for the remainder (part 3) and has correctly applied regulation 12(4)(a) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/05
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 12(4)(d)
IC-238716-P9M1: Business Services Organisation
The complainant has requested information from Business Services Organisation (BSO) relating to the Northern Ireland Electronic Care Record (NIECR). The BSO provided some of the requested information, however this was not provided in a timely manner within the statutory requirements of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, the BSO does not hold any further information in relation to the request and as such, the BSO has complied with its obligations under section 1(1) of FOIA. However, the Commissioner finds that the BSO breached section 10 of FOIA, as it provided information outside of the 20-working day timeframe. The Commissioner does not require the BSO to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1); FOI 10
IC-256543-F4W8: Oldham Council
The complainant has requested information held by Oldham Council (the council) about steps taken following the publication of an Independent Review on historic child sexual exploitation in the Oldham area. The council provided the complainant with some information in response to parts one, two and four of their request. With regard to part three of the request, which asked for information about any disciplinary action that may have been taken against council staff after the Independent Review had been published, the council advised that it was withholding information under section 40(2) – third party personal information – of FOIA. During the Commissioner’s investigation, the council issued a fresh response to part three of the complainant’s request; the council now confirmed that no disciplinary action was taken against any council employees. The Commissioner is satisfied that the information which has now been provided in response to part three of the complainant’s request is an accu
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
IC-253428-Z1P2: Devon County Council
The complainant has requested information held by Devon County Council (the council) about a public footpath. The council initially refused the request under section 41(1) – information provided in confidence - of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). At the internal review stage, the council provided the complainant with some information, and confirmed that it was now withholding the remaining information under section 40(1) – personal data of the requester, and section 40(2) – personal data of third parties. The council subsequently provided the complainant with copies of their personal data in response to a subject access request. During the Commissioner’s investigation the council advised that it was now relying on the exception at regulation 13(1) – third party personal information – of the EIR, as its basis for refusing to provide the remaining withheld information. The Commissioner considers the EIR to be the correct information access regime, and he is satisfied that the
Exemptions cited: EIR 13(1); EIR 14(2)(1); EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2)
IC-261370-F4T1: Kingston Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
The complainant has requested information from Kingston Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) about applicants for jobs. The Trust refused to provide some of the information, citing sections 12 (cost of compliance) and section 22 (future publication) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust has cited section 12(1) of FOIA appropriately. He also accepts that the Trust could not offer any meaningful advice and assistance within the context of the request. However, the Trust breached sections 1(1)(b), 10(1) and 17(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/0532 appeal allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1)(b); FOI 10(1); FOI 12; FOI 16; FOI 17
IC-263818-H5B2: Governing body of Newman Catholic College
The public authority has failed to respond to this request within the timeframe specified under section 10(1) of 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
IC-260064-H0L6: General Dental Council
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
IC-257684-Z7F1: Waltham Forest Council
The complainant requested information from London Borough of Waltham Forest (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 Council 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 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 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
IC-263233-D8C4: Castle Point Borough Council
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(1)
IC-256723-P2Z3: East Riding of Yorkshire Council
The complainant requested information from East Riding of Yorkshire Council (“the Council”) relating to a waste facility.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is not entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) (manifestly unreasonable) to refuse to provide the requested information.The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.Issue a fresh response to the request which does not rely on regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR.The Council must take these steps 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 the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
IC-256701-D3Z7: Warwick District Council
The complainant requested information from Warwick District Council (“the Council”) relating to parking on a specific road.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on section 12(1) (cost limit) of FOIA to refuse to provide the information requested in parts 2 and 3 of the request. He also finds that the Council met its obligations under section 16(1) of FOIA to offer advice and assistance.The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16
IC-248488-G8Q5: Food Standards Agency
The complainant has requested information about animal welfare incidents in slaughterhouses. The Food Standards Agency (FSA) provided some information but relied on exemptions under section 31 (law enforcement), and on section 38 (health and safety) of FOIA to withhold the remaining information. FSA subsequently also applied additional exemptions under section 31, and on section 43 (commercial interests) to the withheld information. The Commissioner’s decision is that FSA is entitled to withhold the specific information the complainant has requested under section 31(1) of FOIA. It’s not necessary for FSA to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
IC-245377-T4D9: Spelthorne Borough Council
The complainant has requested information about Spelthorne Borough Council’s (the Council) handling of a report issued by its auditors. The Council disclosed some information but refused to disclose the remainder, citing sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) and 36(2)(c) (Prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) to refuse the remainder of the request. However, by failing to comply with the request within the statutory time for compliance, the Council breached sections 1(1)(a) and (b), and 10(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 36
IC-245325-F5D4: Attorney General's Office
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Attorney General’s Office is entitled to withhold information about meetings it had with the Embassy of Israel under section 27(1)(a) of FOIA. This is because disclosing it would be likely to prejudice relations between the UK and another State. It’s not necessary for the Attorney General’s Office to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 27
IC-258361-S0Z8: Welsh Government
The complainant requested from the Welsh Government (WG) information relating to the final Fera Science reports. The WG provided some of the information but redacted certain parts as it considered it personal data about a third party and cited regulation 13(1) (personal information) of the EIR.The Commissioner’s decision is that regulation 13(1) of the EIR is not engaged as the withheld information does not comprise personal data.The Commissioner requires the WG to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• The WG must disclose the information withheld under regulation 13(1) of the EIR.The WG must take these steps 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 the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13(1)
IC-245170-Y5T6: Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
The complainant has requested MHRA to disclose information relating to section 3 of its 2021 Annual Report entitled “Delivering High Standards in Medicines Advertising Regulation”. MHRA advised the complainant that it does not hold any recorded information falling within the scope of their request. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities MHRA does not hold any recorded information falling within the scope of the complainant’s request. He does not require any further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
IC-240320-S1M4: Home Office
The complainant has requested information relating contracts awarded by the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) to dispersal accommodation providers in the 2000/2001 financial year. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has correctly relied upon section 12(2) of FOIA to refuse to comply with the request. No steps are required as a result of this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(2); FOI 17
IC-241783-D5T8: Cabinet Office
The complainant has requested information relating to recruitment campaigns and staff organisational charts. The Cabinet Office refused the request under section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious requests).The Commissioner’s decision is that the requests were vexatious and therefore the Cabinet Office is entitled to rely upon section 14(1) of FOIA to refuse them. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
IC-247733-H2V2: Home Office
The complainant has requested information relating to certificates issued under section 275 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.The Home Office relied on section 12 (cost limit) of FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office was entitled to refuse to comply with the request in accordance with section 12(1).The Commissioner finds that the Home Office has complied with its obligations under section 16 of FOIA to offer advice and assistance.The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
IC-254748-T4K3: Cabinet Office
The complainant requested information from the Cabinet Office (CO) relating to briefing materials in response to an Urgent Question in Parliament. The CO refused the request under section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious requests).
The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was not a vexatious request. The Commissioner requires the CO to Issue a fresh response to the complainant, which does not rely on section 14(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
IC-250878-Y3W3: Southwark Council
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Southwark (the Council) relating to historic expenditure data for a housing estate. The Council provided some information within scope of parts [1], [3] and [5] of the request, however, on internal review applied section 12 (cost limit) to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to refuse to comply with the request in accordance with section 12(1) of FOIA. In addition the Commissioner accepts that 12(4)(b) (manifestly unreasonable) of EIR also applies in respect of any environmental information. The Commissioner also finds that the Council complied with its obligations under section 16 of FOIA and regulation 9 of the EIR to offer advice and assistance. Information Tribunal EA/2023/0488 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(1); EIR 12(4)(b)
IC-255091-J9L8: Home Office
The complainant requested passport information about a deceased individual from HM Passport Office, which is part of the Home Office. The Home Office said that it held no information. The complainant persisted and, on its fourth consideration of the matter, the Home Office located and disclosed the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that by failing to disclose information within the 20 working day time for compliance, the Home Office breached sections 1(1)(b) and 10(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
IC-245350-K7K8: Arts Council England
The complainant has requested information about a painting; the Portrait of Mai (Omai). Arts Council England (ACE) disclosed some relevant information and initially relied on section 40 (personal data), section 41 (information provided in confidence) and section 43 (commercial interests) of FOIA to withhold a valuation report and other information. ACE later also applied section 36 (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) of FOIA to the majority of the information it confirmed that it’s withholding. ACE then confirmed that it’s withholding the remainder of the information in scope under section 21 (already accessible to the applicant), section 22 (intended for future publication) and 40. The Commissioner’s decision is that ACE correctly applied sections 36(2)(b)(i) and 36(2)(c) of FOIA to information it’s withholding under those exemptions ie: the Mould valuation report The majority of the information in Annex A1 (‘Annex A Information required by the Reviewing Committee o
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 17; FOI 21; FOI 22; FOI 36; FOI 40
IC-253754-Y8V8: Ministry of Justice
The complainant requested information relating to cases heard by a specified individual, together with details of the defendants that had been on trial and had their verdicts considered by the specified individual. Ultimately, the Ministry of Justice (the ‘MOJ’) denied holding the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOJ does not hold the requested information for the purposes of FOIA for the reasons set out in this notice. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Keywords: Court
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
IC-251512-P4H8: Kingston Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
The complainant has requested information relating to the sale of land by Kingston Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (“the public authority”).The public authority withheld some of the information requested, citing section 43 of FOIA (commercial interests) as its basis for doing so.The Commissioner’s decision is that the commercial confidentiality exception under regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR is engaged for the withheld information and that the public interest favours maintaining the exception.However, as the public authority failed to issue its refusal notice within 20 working days, and also incorrectly considered the request under the FOIA rather than the EIR, the Commissioner has found a breach of regulation 14(2) and 14(3) of the EIR respectively.The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 14(2)(1); EIR 14(3)
IC-248186-K2J6: Department for Work and Pensions
The complainant has requested the Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP) current version of its Unacceptable Behaviour policy and guidance. DWP withheld some of the requested information under section 36(2)(c) (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) and considered that the balance of the public interest lay in maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner finds that DWP has breached sections 10(1), 17(1) and 17(7) as it failed to adequately respond within the statutory timeframe or provide details of its internal review procedure in its refusal notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 17
IC-234149-D7X0: The University of Exeter
The complainant has requested information relating to Liveable Exeter Place Board. The University of Exeter (‘the University’) disclosed information in response to the request, with redactions made under section 40(2) (personal information). The Commissioner’s decision is that some of the redacted information can be withheld under regulation 13 of the EIR but other information must be disclosed. The Commissioner also considers the University breached regulation 14(3) of the EIR. The Commissioner requires the University to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the names of the organisations represented in the attendee lists; disclose the personal data of all members of the Liveable Exeter Place Board, MPs and all senior officials at director level or above or an appropriate equivalent
Exemptions cited: EIR 13; EIR 14(3)
IC-265053-D4Q1: South Wales Police
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
IC-261140-D2J1: Department for Energy Security and Net Zero
The complainant requested information from Department for Energy Security & Net Zero (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.Following the issue of the Decision Notice it was brought
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
IC-245348-F8P3: Lewes District and Eastbourne Borough Council
The complainant requested a copy of a complaint sent to the Council in relation to a specific planning application. The Council withheld the information requested under regulation 13 of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied regulation 13 to the request. He does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13
IC-253193-Q3R2: Ministry of Justice
The complainant requested information relating to a specified employment tribunal. The Ministry of Justice (the ‘MOJ’) denied holding the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOJ does not hold the requested information for the purposes of FOIA for the reasons set out in this notice. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Keywords: Court, court cases
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
IC-256189-S9D1: The University of Cambridge
The complainant has requested a copy of an internal report into a confidential HR investigation. The University of Cambridge (‘the University’) refused to disclose the requested information, citing section 40(2) (personal information) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that disclosure would breach the data protection principles and therefore the requested information is exempt under section 40(2). The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
IC-262228-F2D9: The University of Manchester
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(1)
IC-258898-T3P2: Conwy County Borough Council
The complainant requested information from Conwy County Borough 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 Council 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 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 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
IC-252643-P4C9: Fareham Borough Council
The complainant requested information from Fareham Borough Council (“the Council”) relating to the regeneration of Fareham Town Centre. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is not entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) (manifestly unreasonable) of the EIR to refuse to provide the requested information. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.Issue a fresh response to the request which does not rely on regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR.The Council must take these steps 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 the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
IC-262903-R4Z1: Ministry of Justice
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(1)
IC-255396-V8B9: South Hams District Council
The complainant requested information from South Hams District Council (“the Council”) relating to a planning enforcement complaint.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on regulation 13(1) (personal data) of the EIR to refuse to provide the requested information.The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13(1)
IC-248055-C7H3: Metropolitan Police Service
The complainant has requested costing and general information about events held in Gunnersbury Park from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”). The MPS advised that it was unable to comply with the request as to do so would exceed the appropriate limit in section 12(1) (Cost of compliance) of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that the MPS was entitled to rely on section 12(1) to refuse the request and that it complied with it’s duties under section 16 (Advice and assistance). However, as the MPS responded late, he finds breaches of sections 1(1) (General right of access) and 10(1) (Time for compliance) of FOIA. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 12
IC-254096-Z0S6: Imperial College London
The complainant has requested information on skills bootcamps run by HyperionDev and accredited by Imperial College (the College). The College disclosed or answered the majority of the parts of the request but withheld information relating to the financials of the arrangement under section 43(2) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the College has correctly engaged the exemption in relation to part (3) of the request and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption and withholding the information. However, the Commissioner has found the College has not demonstrated section 43(2) is engaged in relation to the revised part (17) of the request. The Commissioner requires the College to disclose the start and end date of the partnership
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
IC-258416-F6L9: Waverley Borough Council
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(1)
IC-254063-N2T1: University of York
The complainant has requested information on skills bootcamps run by HyperionDev and accredited by the University of York (the University). The University disclosed or answered the majority of the parts of the request but withheld information relating to the financials of the arrangement under section 43(2) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the University has correctly engaged the exemption in relation to part (3) of the request and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption and withholding the information. The Commissioner does find that the public authority breached section 10(1) of FOIA by failing to provide a response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 43
IC-258311-Q1G0: Independent Office for Police Conduct
The complainant has requested information about a shooting from the Independent Office for Police Conduct (“IOPC”). The IOPC refused to comply with the request on the basis that it was vexatious under section 14(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the IOPC was entitled to rely on section 14(1) of FOIA. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
IC-258434-J8W2: Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care
The complainant has requested a copy of a PSA review and any documentation/information used to produce its review of a Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) Tribunal regarding a named individual held between specified dates. The PSA provided some of the information it held but refused to provide anything further, citing section 36 of FOIA – prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs. The Commissioner’s decision is that the PSA has correctly withheld the requested information and the public interest favours withholding the requested information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36