2 Nov 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
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
View Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care
2 Nov 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a report into a maladministration case. The PHSO refused to provide the requested information, citing section 44(1)(a) (prohibitions on disclosure). The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is exempt under section 44(1)(a). The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 44(1)(a)
View The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
2 Nov 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
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
View Metropolitan Police Service
2 Nov 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Ministry of Defence (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 failed to complete its deliberations on the balance of the public interest test within a reasonable time frame and has therefore breached section 17(3) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: either disclose the information it has confirmed it holds, or, to the extent that information is to be withheld, issue a refusal notice in accordance with the requirements of section 17 of the FOIA. The public authority must take this step within 35 calendar days of the date of this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17(3)
View Ministry of Defence
1 Nov 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from Dyfed Powys Police (DPP), information about the number of response and support officers on duty during a specified night shift (8 May 2023). DPP refused to disclose the requested information, citing sections 31(1)(a) and (b) of FOIA (the law enforcement exemption). The Commissioner’s decision is that DPP was correct to rely on sections 31(1)(a) and (b) of FOIA and refuse disclosure. The Commissioner does not require any further steps as a result of this decision notice. Information Tribunal EA/2023/0510 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Dyfed-Powys Police
1 Nov 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested vehicle registration information on decommissioned vehicles disposed at auction in both 2021 and 2022. Kent Police provided some information within the scope of the request but withheld the remainder citing section 31(1)(a) of FOIA – law enforcementThe Commissioner’s decision is that section 31(1)(a) is engaged and that the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(1)(a)
View Kent Police
1 Nov 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the equality impact assessments related to the policies included in the Transforming Support White Paper. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 35(1)(a) is engaged for the disputed information and the public interest lies in maintaining the exemption for the information relating to Occupational Health Market reform but favours disclosure for the information relating to the removal of the Work Capability Assessment. The Commissioner requires the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to disclose the costings and equality impact relating to the decision to remove the Work Capability Assessment. The public authority 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. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/0519 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35
View Department for Work and Pensions
31 Oct 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
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)
View Southend-on-Sea City Council
31 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about illegal migrants. The Home Office stated that it does not hold the requested information.The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Home Office does not hold information of the description set out in the request. The Commissioner does not require the Home Office to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Home Office
31 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Calderdale Council (“the Council”) relating to a planning enforcement matter. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on regulation 13(1) (personal data) to withhold some information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps. First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Information Rights appeal EA/2023/0472 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13(1)
View Calderdale Council
31 Oct 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Financial Ombudsman Service (the FOS). 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 FOS 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 FOS must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The FOS 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
31 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested specified evidence presented by a named police officer at the inquest into the death of a specified individual. Lancashire Constabulary refused to provide the requested information citing section 32(1)(a) of FOIA (a subsection of the exemption for court records). The Commissioner’s decision is that Lancashire Constabulary was entitled to withhold the requested information by virtue of section 32(1)(a) of FOIA. No steps are required as a result of this notice. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/0513 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 32
View Lancashire Constabulary
31 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from the London Borough of Havering (“the Council”), copies of policies relating to financial compensation during a given period. The Council has advised that it does not hold the requested information The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold information within the scope of the complainant’s request. However, the Commissioner finds that the Council has breached section 10(1) of FOIA, as it failed to correctly inform the complainant whether it actually holds the information within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps as a result of this decision notice. Keywords: Private Sector Leasing Scheme
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View London Borough of Havering
31 Oct 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to a specific planning application. Wakefield Council (the “council”) disclosed some information and confirmed that further information was not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the council has provided all the information it holds in relation to the request and that regulation 12(4)(a) applies but that it failed to do this in time and breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 5(2)
View Wakefield Council
30 Oct 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from London Borough of Redbridge Council (“LBRC”) (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(1)
View Redbridge Council
30 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Cabinet Office about the results from a “happiness machine” used to survey staff at Number 10 Downing Street and the Cabinet Office. The Cabinet Office withheld the requested information citing section 36(2)(b)(ii) of FOIA (prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs – inhibit the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation) as its basis for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office is entitled to rely on section 36(2)(b)(ii) to refuse to provide the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the Cabinet Office to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36(2)(b)(ii)
View Cabinet Office
30 Oct 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
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 Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust
30 Oct 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Haringey London Borough Council (the Council), regarding various cemeteries. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council breached section 10 of FOIA as it failed to identify all the requested information that it held, or to communicate all non-exempt information within the scope of the request within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Haringey Council
30 Oct 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
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. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/0491 consent order.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1)
View Croydon Health Services NHS Trust
30 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the monitoring of legal practitioners as referenced by the Minister of State for Immigration. The Home Office refused to provide any of the requested information, citing three limbs of section 36(2) of FOIA (the exemption for prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs). During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the Home Office additionally cited section 31(1)(a) of FOIA (the exemption for the prevention or detection of crime), for all the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office was entitled to rely on sections 36(2)(b)(i), 36(2)(b)(ii) and 36(2)(c) of FOIA to refuse the request, and he finds that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemptions. As he has found section 36 to be engaged, the Commissioner has not deemed it necessary to consider the Home Office’s additional reliance on section 31(1)(a) of FOIA. No steps are required as a result of this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View Home Office
30 Oct 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding exclusions from the duty to register financial interests. The London Borough of Bexley (the Council) relied on section 44 (statutory prohibition) and 40(2) of FOIA (third party personal data) to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on section 40(2). The Commissioner does not require any further action. Information Tribunal EA/2023/0461 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2); FOI 44
View Bexley Council
30 Oct 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information contained in a redacted footnote to a published letter. The above public authority relied on section 40(2) of FOIA (third party personal information) to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 40(2) of FOIA is engaged and that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require further steps.Keywords: manifestly made public, right to object
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Equality and Human Rights Commission
30 Oct 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested various items of information relating to the use of facial recognition software, from Cheshire Constabulary. In its response to the request, Cheshire Constabulary said that some parts of a report assessing the performance of two software systems were exempt from disclosure under section 43 (Commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Cheshire Constabulary was entitled to rely on section 43 to withhold the redacted information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43; FOI 45
View Cheshire Constabulary
27 Oct 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Worcester City Council (the Council) relating to ‘green space’. The Council’s position is that it does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold the requested information. It was therefore correct to apply regulation 12(4)(a) of the EIR. However, the Commissioner has also decided that the council failed to carry out an internal review within the statutory time limit and, therefore, it failed to comply with regulation 11(4) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(4)(a)
View Worcester City Council
27 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the information the complainant has requested about a misconduct hearing is exempt from disclosure under section 31(1)(g) of FOIA by way of section 31(2)(b). Section 31 concerns law enforcement. It’s not necessary for Greater Manchester Police to take any corrective steps. Information Tribunal under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Greater Manchester Police
26 Oct 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant originally requested, from Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (the Council), information not available on the planning portal about a specific planning application. The Council refused to disclose any information, citing regulations 5(3) and 13(1) (personal data), 12(4)(e) (internal communications) and 12(5)(f) (interests of the person who provided the information). Following the Commissioner’s intervention, the Council ultimately issued a revised response to the request, disclosing information and saying the only information now being withheld is the personal data of third parties. The complainant has not disputed the withholding of third party personal data but does not accept that the Council has disclosed all of the information to which they are entitled. The Commissioner considers that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold any further information falling within scope of the request. However he finds a breach of regulation 5(2) of the EIR regardi
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2)
View Stockton-on-Tees Council
26 Oct 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a three-part request for information held by Plymouth City Council (the council) about a Muse concert which took place at a local football club stadium. The council provided some information to the complainant in response to part two and three of their request. However, it withheld all the information contained within a hire agreement which was relevant to part one of the request, citing the exemption at section 43(2) – commercial interests - of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council is entitled to rely on section 43(2) as its basis for withholding only part of the information contained within the hire agreement. The Commissioner has also proactively applied section 40(2) of FOIA to a small set of information, which is the personal data of third parties. As the council failed to provide information relevant to the request within 20 working days, the Commissioner has found a breach of section 10(1) of FOIA. In addition, as the council failed to i
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 17; FOI 17(3); FOI 43(2)
View Plymouth City Council
25 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council (“the council") final project documentation for information for ICT projects completed in 2022. The council initially applied section 43(2), however it subsequently amended its position to apply section 31(1)(a) (prevention and detection of crime). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to apply section 31(1)(a) to withhold the information from disclosure. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(1)(a)
View Redcar and Cleveland Council
25 Oct 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on complaints about senior staff and the number of staff employed by Devon Partnership NHS Trust (‘the Trust’). The Trust withheld the information under section 40(2) of FOIA as it considers it to be someone else’s personal data. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust incorrectly applied section 40(2) of FOIA to part 2 of the request. However the Trust correctly applied this exemption to the information requested in part 1. The Trust must take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: Provide a response, that complies with FOIA, to the request for the number of staff at the organisation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Devon Partnership NHS Trust
25 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to the renewal of a permit for banger racing. Cornwall Council (the Council) refused to disclose the information at part 1 of the request, citing regulation 13(1) (personal information) of the EIR. The Council also stated that part 2 of the request was not seeking recorded information.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on regulation 13(1) of the EIR to withhold information within the scope of part 1 of the request. The Commissioner also finds that part 2 of the request was not seeking recorded information, therefore the Council was not obliged to respond to it under the EIR.The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13(1); EIR 5(1)
View Cornwall Council
25 Oct 2023Complaint 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 Swindon Borough Council
25 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to a specified Employment Tribunal Judgement. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) denied holding the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the information sought by the complainant is not held by the MoJ for the purposes of FOIA and that the MoJ is entitled to rely on section 3(2)(a) (public authorities) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal EA/2023/0459 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
View Ministry of Justice
25 Oct 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Warrington Borough Council (“the Council”) on 3 July 2023. By the date of this notice the Council had not issued a substantive response to the 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
View Warrington Council
25 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office relating to recorded details on birth certificates. The Home Office responded stating that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Home Office does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Home Office
25 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to an Employment Tribunal process or procedure. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) denied holding the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the information is not held by the MoJ for the purposes of FOIA and that the MoJ is entitled to rely on section 3(2) (public authorities) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
View Ministry of Justice
25 Oct 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about an Article 4 Direction associated with Braddon Woods. Torridge District Council (‘the Council’) disclosed some information. It has applied the exceptions under regulations 12(5)(b), 12(4)(e) and 13 of the EIR to the remaining information, which concern the course of justice, internal correspondence and personal data respectively. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: On the balance of probabilities, the Council doesn’t hold any further information within scope of the request of 21 February 2023 and has complied with regulation 5(1) of the EIR. The information within scope of part 1 of the request is excepted from disclosure under regulation 12(5)(b). However, the Council’s refusal of this part didn’t comply with regulation 14(3) of the EIR. It’s not necessary for the Council to take any corrective steps. Information Tribunal EA/2023/0475 FTT Appeal Allowed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 14; EIR 5
View Torridge District Council
24 Oct 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Oxfordshire County Council (“the Council”) in relation to low traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) in Cowley and East Oxford, including regarding bollards and ANPR (automatic number plate recognition). The Council disclosed some information within the scope of the request and provided a link to the agenda, decisions and minutes for a cabinet meeting which contained some information within the scope of the request. The complainant believes that the Council holds further information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold further information within the scope of the request. However, the Commissioner has also concluded that the Council has failed to comply with regulation 11(4) of the EIR in this case as it failed to provide an internal review decision within 40 working days of the date of receipt of a request for review.The Commissioner does not require the Council
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 5(1)
View Oxfordshire County Council
24 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to project licences for animal testing. The Home Office provided some of the requested information, with redactions applied, citing sections 21 (information accessible to applicant by other means), 44(1)(a) (prohibitions on disclosure) and 38(1)(health and safety) of FOIA to withhold the remaining information. The Commissioner considered the Home Office’s application of sections 44(1) and 38(1). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office is entitled to rely on sections 44(1) and 38(1) of FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal EA/2023/0485 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 38; FOI 44
View Home Office
24 Oct 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested tendering information about a feasibility study carried out by Ricardo Plc from Mid Sussex District Council (’the council’). The council refused the request under section 43(2) of FOIA. During the course of the Commissioner's investigation the Commissioner advised the council that the information was likely to be environmental information and that it should have been considered under the EIR. It therefore applied Regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was not correct to consider the information under FOIA as it is environmental information for the purposes of the EIR. He has, however, decided that the council was correct to apply Regulation 12(5)(e) to withhold the information from disclosure. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); FOI 39
View Mid Sussex District Council
24 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested a copy of a report on the environment aspects of the Alignment Refinement Options relating to the Norwich Western Link Road project (NWL project). The Council withheld the information requested under regulation 12(4)(d) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly applied regulation 12(4)(d) to the request. He does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d)
View Norfolk County Council
24 Oct 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
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)
24 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Mid and East Antrim Borough Council (the Council) information regarding the score sheets – job evaluation of Duty Manager (Amphitheatre Leisure). The Council refused the request and cited sections 36(2)(b)(i), 36(2)(b)(ii) and 36(2)(c) (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council did not deal with the request under the correct access regime. The information requested is the complainant’s personal data and is therefore exempt under FOIA by virtue of section 40(1) (personal information).The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(1)
24 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to project licences for animal testing. The Home Office provided some of the requested information, with redactions applied, citing sections 21 (information accessible to applicant by other means), 44(1)(a) (prohibitions on disclosure) and 38(1)(health and safety) of FOIA to withhold the remaining information. The Commissioner considered the Home Office’s application of sections 44(1) and 38(1). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office is entitled to rely on sections 44(1) and 38(1) of FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 38; FOI 44
View Home Office
24 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of expense claim forms submitted by elected members for the period 2021-2022. Goole Town Council (the Council) stated that it did not hold the information requested. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold the information requested and has complied with its obligations under section 1(1) of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
23 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from Bedfordshire Police, information about the number of response and support officers on duty during a specified night shift (8 May 2023). Bedfordshire Police refused to disclose the requested information, citing section 31(1) of FOIA (the law enforcement exemption). The Commissioner’s decision is that Bedfordshire Police was correct to rely on section 31(1) of FOIA and refuse disclosure. The Commissioner does not require any further steps as a result of this decision notice. Information Tribunal EA/2023/0494 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Bedfordshire Police
23 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from Cambridgeshire Constabulary, information about the number of response and support officers on duty during a specified night shift (8 May 2023). Cambridgeshire Constabulary refused to disclose the requested information, citing section 31(1) of FOIA (the law enforcement exemption). The Commissioner’s decision is that Cambridgeshire Constabulary was correct to rely on section 31(1) of FOIA and refuse disclosure. The Commissioner does not require any further steps as a result of this decision notice. Information Tribunal EA/2023/0500 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Cambridgeshire Constabulary
23 Oct 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) about Operation Snap. MPS disclosed some information within the scope of the request, but withheld the remaining information in accordance with section 40(2) (personal information) of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that MPS was correct to rely on section 40(2) to withhold the remaining information. However, MPS breached sections 10(1) and 17(1) of FOIA as it failed to provide its response to the request within the statutory 20 working days.The Commissioner does not require MPS to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 17; FOI 40(2)
View Metropolitan Police Service
23 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from Suffolk Constabulary, information about the number of response and support officers on duty during a specified night shift (8 May 2023). Suffolk Constabulary refused to disclose the requested information, citing sections 31(1)(a) and (b) of FOIA (the law enforcement exemption). The Commissioner’s decision is that Suffolk Constabulary was correct to rely on sections 31(1)(a) and (b) of FOIA and refuse disclosure. The Commissioner does not require any further steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Suffolk Constabulary
23 Oct 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) about central ticket office disposals. MPS disclosed some information within the scope of the request, but withheld the remaining information in accordance with section 40(2) (personal information) of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that MPS was correct to rely on section 40(2) to withhold the remaining information. However, MPS breached sections 10(1) and 17(1) of FOIA, as it failed to provide its response to the request within the statutory 20 working days.The Commissioner does not require MPS to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 17; FOI 40(2)
View Metropolitan Police Service
23 Oct 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the General Dental Council (GDC)information about ‘points of learning’ relating to a fitness to practice (FTP) case. The GDC answered some of the questions asked and withheld some information, citing section 42 of the FOIA (legal professional privilege). The Commissioner’s decision is that the GDC is entitled to rely on section 42 to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the GDC to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 42
View General Dental Council