8 May 2026Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information held by Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (the council) about its investigation into an alleged encroachment onto public land. The council refused the request, citing section 42 (legal professional privilege) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). During the Commissioner’s investigation, the council also referred to the exemptions at sections 40 (personal information) and 36 (effective conduct of public affairs). The council later advised that it considered the EIR was the correct access regime, and was withholding all information under the exceptions at regulation 12(5)(b) (course of justice) and regulation 13 (personal information). The Commissioner’s decision is that the EIR is the correct access regime, and that the council is entitled to withhold all of the requested information under regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. However, the Commissioner has determined that the council breached regulations 14(2) and 14(3) of the EIR by failing
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 14(3); EIR 14(2)
View Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council
8 May 2026Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to a complaint. The public authority (“the public authority”) disclosed information but also refused information under regulation 12(4)(e) (internal communications) and regulation 12(4)(a) (information not held) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that: on the balance of probabilities the public authority has identified all of the information in scope and all of the withheld information represents the complainant’s personal data and so is exempt under the EIR in accordance with regulation 5(3) (duty to make available environmental information on request). The Commissioner cannot require the public authority to take any further action as a result of this notice. However, he strongly urges it to consider his comments in ‘other matters’ of this notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
8 May 2026Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the number of homes on St Helens Council’s housing register and a breakdown of allocations by citizenship status. St Helens Council (the council) stated that it did not hold information in scope of part one of the request and withheld information in scope of part two under section 38 of FOIA (health and safety). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council, on the balance of probabilities, does not hold information in scope of part one of the request. The Commissioner also finds that the council was entitled to rely on section 38 of FOIA to withhold information falling in scope of part two of the request. The Commissioner has recorded a procedural breach of section 10(1) of FOIA in relation to part three of the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10(1); FOI 38
View St Helens Council
8 May 2026Complaint 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. For archival (closed) records held by TNA, it can have up to 10 additional working days where the request relates to a closed public record. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View The National Archives
8 May 2026Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of the Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists’ investigation case file into Global Counsel Limited, including evidence gathered, internal documents, records of meetings, and relevant correspondence held on its case management system. The Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists (the Registrar) refused to provide the information citing section 30(1)(a) and (b) by virtue of section 30(2)(a)(i) and (iv) (Investigations and proceedings), section 41(1) (Information provided in confidence) and section 42(1) (Legal professional privilege) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Registrar was correct to rely on sections 30 and 42 of FOIA to refuse to provide the information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30; FOI 42(1)
View Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists
8 May 2026Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from the Home Office information concerning its contracts with VFS Global / VF Worldwide Services. The Home Office provided some details relating to the information requested and withheld the remaining information under section 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is the Home Office was entitled to rely on section 43(2) of FOIA to withhold only some of the information requested. He finds that not all of the information is commercially sensitive, therefore section 43(2) of FOIA is not engaged.
The Commissioner requires the Home Office to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation:
• Disclose the information detailed within the confidential annex to this notice, The annex has been made available to the Home Office only.
The public authority must take this step within 30 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this f
Exemptions cited: FOI 43(2)
View Home Office
7 May 2026Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from London Borough of Lambeth about a consultation and related documents. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View London Borough of Lambeth
7 May 2026Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a multi-part request for information from City of York Council (the “council”) about its membership of Stonewall, related expenditure, and internal consideration of safeguarding concerns and single sex services. The council disclosed some information, stated some was not held, and withheld other information under sections 21 and 36 of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that:
• Part 1: Section 21 was correctly applied to the spending information; however, the council breached section 16 by failing to provide adequate advice and assistance in its original response. This was remedied during the investigation.
• Part 2: Some information constitutes the complainant’s personal data and is exempt under section 40(1). Section 36(2)(b)(i), (ii) and (c) are engaged in respect of all remaining information, and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption.
• Part 6: The council complied with section 1(1) by correctly confirming that no information was held.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 16; FOI 21; FOI 36; FOI 40
View York City Council
7 May 2026Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about an incident where bio beads were accidently released from a wastewater treatment site. Southern Water Services Ltd (‘Southern Water’) provided responses to parts one and two of the request and relied on regulation 12(4)(e) of the EIR (internal communications), regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR (course of justice) and regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR (manifestly unreasonable) to withhold the internal correspondence requested in part three. The Commissioner’s decision is that Southern Water was entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(e) of the EIR to withhold the internal correspondence. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e); EIR 12(5)(b)
7 May 2026Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the BBC about a ‘Radio 2 in the Park’ event. The Commissioner’s decision is that this informationwould be held by the BBC for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and so is not covered by FOIA. He therefore upholds the BBC’s position and requires no steps to be taken in this case.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
View BBC
7 May 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Greater Manchester Police
7 May 2026Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of external reviews and resultant action plans relating to maternity services run by East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust (the Trust). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust is entitled to rely on section 41(1) of FOIA to refuse disclosure of an external review which it holds in scope of part three of the request. The Commissioner has recorded breaches of sections 1, 10(1) and 17(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10(1); FOI 41(1); FOI 17(1)
View East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust
7 May 2026Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on student enrolments. The University of Greater Manchester (‘the university’) provided some of the requested information but relied on section 43 of FOIA (commercial interests) to withhold the breakdown of student nationality by university-validated course delivered at Regent College London (RCL). The Commissioner’s decision is that the university was entitled to rely on section 43 of FOIA to withhold the remainder of the requested information. He also finds that the university breached sections 1(1), 10(1) and 17(1) of FOIA, and that it did not meet its section 16 obligations to provide advice and assistance in its response to the original request. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 16; FOI 17; FOI 43
View Bolton NHS Trust
7 May 2026Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from London Borough of Harrow about revenue generated from a bus gate. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Harrow Council
7 May 2026Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR by failing to provide a response within 20 working days.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Central Bedfordshire Council
7 May 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
7 May 2026Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to Anglia Ruskin University (the university) for information regarding academic misconduct and plagiarism amongst its students for a specific time period.
The university refused to disclose the requested information, citing section 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA as its basis for doing so.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the university was not entitled to rely upon section 43(2) to withhold the requested information.
The Commissioner requires the university to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
• Disclose the requested information.
The university must take these steps within 30 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: FOI 43(2)
7 May 2026Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Cabinet Office seeking firstly the number of ministers of who made declarations about their tax affairs and secondly the names of any ministers and copies of any declarations. The Cabinet Office refused the first part of the request on the basis of sections 36(2)(c) (effective conduct of public affairs), 40(2) (personal data) and 41(1) (information provided in confidence). The Cabinet Office refused to confirm or deny whether it held any information falling within the scope of the second part of the request on the basis of sections 36(3), 41(2) and 40(5). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office can rely on section 36(2)(c) to refuse the first part of the request and rely on section 36(3) to refuse to confirm or deny whether it holds any information falling within the scope of part 2 of the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View Cabinet Office
7 May 2026Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made eight requests for information about surveillance cameras. Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council withheld some of the requested information under the exemptions provided by section 31(1)(a) (Law enforcement) and section 43(2) (Commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to withhold some of the information under section 31(1)(a) and that the public interest favours maintaining that exemption. However, the Commissioner has found that the Council is not entitled to withhold the remainder of the information under either exemption. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: For request 1, the Council should disclose the information. For request 8, the Council should disclose the information referred to as ‘Document 2’ in this decision, except for paragraphs 3, 3.1, 3.2, 4.0, and any personal data that should be redacted in accordance with the Data Protect
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(1)(a); FOI 43(2)
View Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
7 May 2026Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
A public authority will breach section 10 of FOIA if it fails to respond to a request within 20 working days. Based on evidence available to the Commissioner, by the date of this notice the Trust has not issued a substantive response to this request. Therefore the Commissioner finds a breach of section 10. The Trust must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
The Trust must take this step within 30 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 Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust
6 May 2026Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Home Office about people held in detention under immigration powers.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
6 May 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1)
View Barking and Dagenham Council
6 May 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View The National Lottery Community Fund
6 May 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
6 May 2026Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on a range of topics. The Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (the ICRIR) provided some information, but refused to confirm or deny whether it held information relating to whether its staff included current or former members of the security and intelligence services. The ICRIR cited section 23(5) of FOIA (information provided by or relating to the security services) in respect of this part of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the ICRIR was entitled to rely on section 23(5). No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 23
View The Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery
6 May 2026Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Ministry of Defence (MOD) for a copy of the final report of the Royal Navy Cadet Forces Independent Review. The MOD withheld information on the basis of 36(2)(b)(i), (ii) and (c) (effective conduct of public affairs), 40(2) (personal data) and 41(1) (information provided in confidence) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of sections 36(2)(b)(i), (ii) and (c) and the public interest favours maintaining each of the exemptions.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View Ministry of Defence
6 May 2026Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Leeds City Council (“the Council”) relating to a specific planning enforcement case. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on regulation 13(5A) to refuse to confirm or deny whether the requested information is held. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13(5a)
View Leeds City Council
6 May 2026Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about school uniforms. The Department for Education (“the public authority”) withheld the requested information under section 35(1)(a) (formulation of government policy). The Commissioner’s decision is that the withheld information engages section 35(1)(a) and the public interest lies in maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35(1)(a)
View Department for Education
6 May 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
6 May 2026Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to the redaction of a comment posted in respect of a planning application published on the Northern Ireland Planning Portal. The Council said it did not hold any recorded information that would explain why this particular redaction was made. The complainant argued that the Council had failed to comply with regulation 4 (proactive dissemination of environmental information), regulation 5 (duty to make environmental information available), regulation 9 (advice and assistance), regulation 12 (application of exceptions) and regulation 14 (refusal notice) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council does not hold the requested information. However he finds that the Council failed to comply with regulation 14 in that it ought to have cited the appropriate exception (regulation 12(4)(a)) in its refusal notice. The Commissioner does not uphold the complaints regarding regulations 4, 5 or 9. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 14; EIR 4; EIR 5; EIR 9
6 May 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View College of Policing
6 May 2026Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a copy of a report into the leasing of units at Mochdre Commerce Park. Conwy County Borough Council (the Council) withheld the information requested under section 42 (legal professional privilege) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly applied section 42 of the FOIA to the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 42
View Conwy County Borough Council
6 May 2026Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested the names of recipients/suppliers for entries recorded as “General Expenses” within Oxford City Council’s (the “council”) published Spend over £500 Report, and/or an explanation for
any withholding. The council withheld certain information under section 40(2) (personal information).
The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has complied with section 1(1) FOIA by confirming what information it holds within scope and that section 40(2) was correctly applied to the withheld information.
The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1); FOI 40(2)
View Oxford City Council
6 May 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1)
View Derby City Council
6 May 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
6 May 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1)
View De Montfort University
5 May 2026Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
5 May 2026Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Home Office relating to settlement application decisions made by the Home Office.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
5 May 2026Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about two alleged meetings from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”). The MPS would neither confirm nor deny (“NCND”) holding any information, citing sections 27(4) (International relations) and 40(5) (Personal information) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MPS was entitled to rely on section 27(4) of FOIA. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 27
View Metropolitan Police Service
5 May 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1)
View Dudley Council
1 May 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Epping Forest District Council
1 May 2026Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant asked Gravesham Borough Council for information about Traffic Penalty Tribunal proceedings linked to specific Penalty Charge Notices. The council disclosed some information but withheld the name of the member of staff who represented it at the tribunal, relying on section 40(2) of FOIA. The Commissioner decided that the council was entitled to withhold this information, as disclosing the name would breach data protection law. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any further action.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Gravesham Borough Council
30 Apr 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
30 Apr 2026Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about payments made to Palantir Technologies UK Limited. NHS England (NHSE) relied on section 43 of FOIA (commercial interests), section 31 of FOIA (law enforcement) and section 41 of FOIA (provided in confidence) to withhold the requested invoice copies. It stated that it did not hold any further information within scope of the remainder of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHSE was entitled to rely on section 31 of FOIA to withhold the information relating to the layout of the requested invoices, but only where that information reveals the format or template of the invoices. However, he finds that NHSE was not entitled to rely on sections 43 and 41 to withhold the pricing information within the invoices. He also finds that, on the balance of probabilities, NHSE does not hold the information requested in questions two to four of the request. The Commissioner requires NHSE to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 1(1); FOI 10; FOI 31; FOI 41; FOI 43; FOI 17(1)
View NHS England
30 Apr 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Waltham Forest Council
30 Apr 2026Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) about a specific case. The CPS citied section 42(1) – (legal professional privilege) and section 30(1) – (investigations and proceedings conducted by public authorities) of FOIA to withhold information in scope of the request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that any information the CPS held within the scope of the request, not already in the public domain, would be historical criminal offence personal data. Therefore, not only was the CPS entitled to withhold any relevant information not already in the public domain but should in fact have relied upon section 40(2) of FOIA to do so, given the historical and personal nature of the information.
The Commissioner does not require any steps as a result of this decision.
Keywords: Cold case
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Crown Prosecution Service
30 Apr 2026Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from HM Revenue and Customs relating to an internal handling record for a FOI request. A public authority will breach section 10 of FOIA if it fails to respond to a request within 20 working days. Based on evidence available to the Commissioner, the public authority did not provide a valid response within the statutory time frame. Therefore the Commissioner finds a breach of section 10.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View HM Revenue & Customs
30 Apr 2026Complaint 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 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Sandwell Council
29 Apr 2026Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Ministry of Defence (MOD) seeking information about a meeting between its Senior Advisor for the Middle East and North Africa and the Tunisian Minister of National Defence. The MOD confirmed that it held the requested information but it considered this to be exempt from disclosure on the basis of sections 27(1)(a) and 27(2) (international relations) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of sections 27(1)(a) and 27(2) and that the public interest favours maintaining each exemption. However, the MOD breached section 17(1) by failing to issue its refusal notice within twenty working days.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 27
View Ministry of Defence
29 Apr 2026Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
A public authority will breach section 10 of FOIA if it fails to respond to a request within 20 working days. Based on evidence available to the Commissioner, by the date of this notice the public authority has not issued a substantive response to this request. Therefore the Commissioner finds a breach of section 10. 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 30 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust