17 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made six requests on the subject of how the Home Office manages migrant vessels in the Channel, received over an eight day period in February 2023. The Home Office aggregated the requests, as they were similar in context and overall scope, and refused to provide any of the requested information on the basis that to do so would exceed the cost of compliance (section 12(1) of FOIA). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office was entitled to aggregate the requests under section 12(4) of FOIA and has properly relied on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the requests. The Commissioner considers that the Home Office has complied with its obligations under section 16(1) of FOIA to provide adequate advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this notice.Keywords: Aggregation, small boats, crossings
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Home Office
17 Jul 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested background information relating to the “Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy: 2022 to 2025” from the Cabinet Office. The Cabinet Office provided some information but withheld the remainder citing sections 35(1) (Formulation of Government policy) and 40(2) (Personal information) of FOIA. The complainant queried the small amount of information that had been considered and the Cabinet Office then applied section 12(1) (Cost of compliance) to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office failed to complete its deliberations on the balance of the public interest within a reasonable time and therefore breached section 17(3) of FOIA. He also finds that the Cabinet Office was entitled to rely on section 12(1) and that there was no breach of section 16(1) (Advice and assistance). No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16; FOI 17
View Cabinet Office
17 Jul 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to a planning application. Newport City Council (the council) provided some information and then provided further information during the Commissioner’s investigations. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council holds no further information and therefore regulation 12(4)(a) of the EIR is engaged. The Commissioner also finds that the council breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR as it did not provide all the information held within the required 20 working days. As the information has been provided, the Commissioner does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 5(2)
View Newport City Council
17 Jul 2023Complaint 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 Nottingham City Council
17 Jul 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested, from Flintshire County Council (the Council), information about communication between the Council and the site owner of a residential park, relating to the land. The complainant wanted information “particularly in relation to applications for a site licence and enforcement of the conditions of the site licence”. The Council handled the request under the EIR and refused to provide any information, citing (in its internal review) regulation 12(5)(b) and 12(4)(e) (the course of justice and internal communications exceptions). The exception that the complaint focuses on is regulation 12(5)(b). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to withhold information under regulation 12(5)(b). However he also finds that the Council breached regulation 11(4) because it took more than 40 working days to provide its internal review. The Commissioner does not require any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(5)(b)
View Flintshire County Council
17 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
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
View Essex Police
17 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about MPs’ staff turnover. The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority disclosed information in the form of an anonymised dataset, with some information removed under the exemption provided by section 40(2) (Personal information) on the basis that it would reveal the personal data of third parties. The Commissioner’s decision is that that IPSA has correctly applied section 40(2). The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/0357 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
14 Jul 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 Bristol City Council
14 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of information passed to Stonewall regarding Stonewall’s Equality Index 2020, and the rating received from Stonewall. The then Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (now the Department for Culture, Media and Sport or DCMS) refused the request under section 43(2) (prejudice to commercial interests), and section 41 (information provided in confidence) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that DCMS has failed to demonstrate that either exemption is engaged and he requires DCMS to disclose the withheld information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41; FOI 43
View Department for Culture, Media and Sport
13 Jul 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 Bristol City Council
13 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested correspondence held by the Northern Ireland Assembly regarding Private Members’ Bills. The Assembly stated that it was acting in a legislative capacity as set out at regulation 3(3) of the EIR, therefore it was not required to process the request under the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that in the circumstances of this particular request the Assembly is acting in a legislative capacity, therefore the Assembly is not required to respond to the request under the EIR. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 3
13 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) about staff hiring and retention. HSE 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 17(3)
View Health and Safety Executive
13 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has asked the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (the MCA) for information relating to distress calls made from the English Channel. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the MCA holds no further recorded information relevant to the complainant’s request and has complied with section 1(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken by the MCA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Maritime and Coastguard Agency
13 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested meta-data associated with an earlier information request of theirs to HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC). The Commissioner’s decision is that HMRC breached sections 10(1) and 17(1) of FOIA, because it failed to disclose information and issue its refusal for the withheld information within 20 working days of receiving the request. The Commissioner does not require any further steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 17
13 Jul 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) emails from and to Jim Harra, the Chief Executive of HMRC, containing or referencing certain terms or words over a number of specified months in 2019. HMRC disclosed some emails but withheld information under sections 36(2)(b), 36(2)(c) and 44(1)(a) of FOIA (the exemptions for ‘prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs’ and ‘prohibitions on disclosure’). The Commissioner’s decision is that HMRC has correctly applied the above exemptions to withhold the redacted information in this case. However he also finds that HMRC breached sections 10(3) and 17(3) of FOIA in respect of the time taken to respond. The Commissioner does not require any further steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 17(3); FOI 36(2)(b); FOI 36(2)(c); FOI 44(1)(a)
13 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
Summary wording for website: The complainant requested information from HM Treasury (“HMT”) relating to Rishi Sunak’s ministerial diary for a six week period during his role as Chancellor of the Exchequer. HMT refused the request under section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious requests). The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was not vexatious. The Commissioner requiresHMT to issue a fresh response to the request under FOIA without relying on section 14(1).
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View HM Treasury
13 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from NHS England in relation to the Data Security & Protection toolkit submitted for 2021/2022. NHS England refused to provide the information, citing section 44(1)(a) of FOIA – prohibitions on disclosure. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS England was entitled to rely on section 44(1)(a) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 44(1)(a)
View NHS England
13 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust (“the Trust”) relating to its zero tolerance policy and documentation referenced within the policy.The Commissioner’s decision is the Trust failed to provide an adequate response to the request as it responded to the first part, however it failed to respond to the second part. Consequently the Commissioner finds that the Trust breached section 1(1) and section 10(1) of the FOIA.The Commissioner requires the Trust to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• The Trust must issue a fresh response to the second part of the complainant’s request which is adequate for the purposes of FOIA. The Trust 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 FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust
12 Jul 2023Complaint 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 35 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17(3)
View Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
12 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information in the form of a series of questions about the use of a specific property by Newport City Council (“the Council”). The Commissioner’s decision is that the withheld information comprises of special category personal data and the Council is entitled to rely on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold the information for parts three and four of the request and has complied with section 1(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Newport City Council
12 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to complaints made to Speak Up about bullying. Channel 4 refused the request as vexatious under section 14(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Channel 4 is not entitled to rely on section 14(1) of FOIA in this case. The Commissioner requires Channel 4 to issue a fresh response to the complainant which does not rely on section 14(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Channel 4
12 Jul 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 Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust
11 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested DHSC to disclose information relating to the process of evaluation for Evusheld (a medicine used to prevent Covid-19 in adults and adolescents). It disclosed some information to the complainant but then claimed a late reliance on section 12 of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that DHSC is entitled to rely on section 12 of FOIA. It provided appropriate advice and assistance to the complainant and has therefore met its obligations under section 16 of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further action to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Department of Health and Social Care
11 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that ‘Receiver of Wreck’ information that the complainant has requested is exempt from disclosure under sections 41(1) and 43(2) of FOIA. This is because it’s both information that was provided in confidence and commercial information. It’s not necessary for the Maritime and Coastguard Agency to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41; FOI 43
View Maritime and Coastguard Agency
11 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested Defra to disclose information relating to the amount of waste discharged into the sea and watercourses in and around the UK, the fines issued year on year and the profit and bonuses of water companies. Defra confirmed that it does not hold the requested information and therefore wished to rely on regulation 12(4)(a) of the EIR. Where it could, it directed the complainant to the relevant public authority or source of the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities Defra does not hold the requested information. It is therefore entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(a) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require any further action to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
11 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from the Foreign Commonwealth & Development Office (“FCDO”) copies of its annual reviews of the United States, from 2000-2005. The FCDO stated that it did not hold an annual review for 2001 and refused to disclose the remaining annual reviews, citing section 27 of FOIA as a basis for non-disclosure.The Commissioner’s decision is that the FCDO has correctly relied on section 27 of FOIA. The Commissioner has also decided that the FCDO has breached section 10(1) of FOIA as it did not provide a response to the complainant within 20 working days.The Commissioner does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 27
View Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
11 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested a copy of legal advice from Braintree District Council (‘the council’) about a planning application which was under appeal. The council refused the request, applying regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to apply regulation 12(5)(b) to withhold the information from disclosure. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any further steps. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/0386 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View Braintree District Council
11 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to policing at a Let Women Speak event. By the date of this notice the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (Met) had not issued a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Met 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 Met to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Met must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The Met 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 Metropolitan Police Service
11 Jul 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant submitted a request to The National Archives (TNA) for all the environmental information held within the closed file, “PREM 19/4955 ROYAL FAMILY. HRH The Prince of Wales: part 4” (PREM 19/4955). TNA provided the complainant with a copy of some information, stating that it considered this to be all the environmental information that was held that was relevant to the request. TNA also confirmed that it considered the remaining information contained within closed file PREM 19/4955 to be exempt from disclosure under section 37(1)(a) – communications with the Sovereign, section 40(2) – personal data, and section 41(1) - information given in confidence, of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that TNA has provided the complainant with a copy of all the environmental information held within the closed file PREM 19/4955. Furthermore, the Commissioner is satisfied that TNA is entitled to rely on section 37(1)(a) of FOIA as its basis for withholding the remaining information cont
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2); FOI 37
View The National Archives
11 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested DHSC to disclose the minutes of meetings of the Cross Whitehall International Recruitment Steering Group from 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022. DHSC disclosed some information but withheld the remainder citing section 35, 27 and 28 of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that DHSC is entitled to rely on sections 35, 27 and 28 of FOIA. He therefore does not require any further action to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 27; FOI 28; FOI 35
View Department of Health and Social Care
11 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
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
View CQC
11 Jul 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Office of the West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner (WMPCC) for correspondence between the Police and Crime Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner and Green Lane Masjid.The Commissioner’s decision is that WMPCC was entitled to rely on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold the information. However, in failing to respond to the request within the statutory timescale, the Commissioner has determined that WMPCC breached section 10(1) of FOIA.The Commissioner does not require further steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 40(2)
11 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of any viability assessments and related correspondence on reported plans to use two holiday camps to house asylum seekers. The Home Office would neither confirm nor deny holding the information, citing section 38(2) (Health and safety) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office was not entitled to rely on section 38(2) to refuse to confirm or deny whether it holds any information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner requires the Home Office to confirm or deny that it holds any information falling within the scope of the request. If it does hold information, either this information should be disclosed in accordance with section 1(1)(b) of FOIA, or the Home Office should explain the exemption(s) being relied upon to withhold it, in accordance with its obligations under section 17 of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 38
View Home Office
11 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to Emergency Travel Document (‘ETD’) applications for Eritrea between 2019 and 2021. The Home Office refused to disclose the requested information, citing sections 27(1)(a) (International relations) and 31(1)(e) (Law enforcement) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office is entitled to rely on section 27(1)(a) and that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/0360 appeal allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 27
View Home Office
11 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the University of Greenwich (“the University”) in relation to disciplinary hearings. The University has refused to provide the requested information, citing section 12(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the University was not entitled to reply on section 12(1) when refusing this request. The Commissioner also finds that the University did meet its section 16 obligations to provide advice and assistance to refine the request. The Commissioner requires the University to provide a fresh response to the request, that does not rely on section 12 of FOIA. 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.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1)
View The University of Greenwich
11 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to Emergency Travel Document applications for Somalia between 2019 to 2021. The Home Office refused to provide the requested information, citing sections 27(1)(a) (International relations) and 31(1)(e) (Law enforcement) of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office is entitled to rely on section 27(1)(a) and that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/0359 appeal allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 27
View Home Office
11 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information about a planning application that they submitted to the Council. West Oxfordshire District Council (the Council) stated that all information relating to the planning application was available on its website. In its internal review response the Council sought to apply regulation 12(4)(b) (manifestly unreasonable) of the EIR to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request falls under the EIR, but that regulation 5(3) of the EIR applies as the information is the complainant’s own personal data. This means that the Council was not obliged to comply with the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5
View West Oxfordshire District Council
11 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about meetings regarding the creative industries. ACAS initially stated that the information requested was exempt under section 44 (prohibitions on disclosure). During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation ACAS confirmed that it did not hold any information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, ACAS holds no recorded information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner has also determined that the information is not held on behalf of ACAS by a third party. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 3
View Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service
10 Jul 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to a student complaint made to the University of Bolton (the University). The University relied on section 40(2) (third party personal data) to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the University is entitled to rely on section 40(2) to withhold the requested information. However, he has recorded a procedural breach of section 17(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the University to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 40(2)
View Bolton NHS Trust
10 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding meetings of Croydon London Borough Council’s (“the Council”) Corporate Management Team (‘CMT’) from 1 May 2022 onwards. The Council refused the request, citing sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii), and 36(2)(c) (Prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs) of FOIA as a basis for non-disclosure.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) to refuse the request. As he considers that sections 32(2)(b)(i) and (ii) apply to the requested information in its entirety, he has not considered the Council’s application of section 36(2)(c).The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View London Borough of Croydon
10 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about an Export Insurance Policy (“EXIP”). UK Export Finance (“UKEF”) provided some information within scope of the request and withheld the remainder with reliance on section 41(1) (information provided in confidence) and section 43(2)(commercial interests) of FOIA. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation UKEF also sought to rely on section 40(2)(personal information), section 42(1) (legal professional privilege), and section 27(1)(a)(c) and (d)(international relations) of FOIA to withhold the remainder of the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that UKEF is entitled to rely on section 27(1)(a)(c) and (d) to withhold the remainder of the requested information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 27
View UK Export Finance
10 Jul 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 Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
10 Jul 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 London Borough of Tower Hamlets
10 Jul 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 Newcastle City Council
10 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to equalities impact assessments. The Commissioner’s decision is that His Majesty’s Treasury (HMT) is entitled to rely on section 35(1)(a) – formulation and development of government policy, to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require HMT to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Key words: equality impact assessment
Exemptions cited: FOI 35
View HM Treasury
10 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested ecological and wildlife surveys, associated reports and assessments for a specified air base which is a potential site (subject to a planning application and permission) for the building of two new prisons. The Ministry of Justice (the ‘MOJ’) refused to provide any of the requested information citing Regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR (the exception for confidentiality of commercial or industrial information). The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOJ is not entitled to withhold the requested information under Regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR for the reasons set out in this notice. He requires the MOJ to disclose that information withheld under Regulation 12(5)(e), ensuring that any personal data is redacted where necessary, within 35 calendar days of this notice.Keywords: Contamination
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e)
View Ministry of Justice
10 Jul 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 Metropolitan Police Service
10 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested the name of a Court Clerk who had presided over a specified hearing. The Ministry of Justice refused to disclose the name of the now former clerk, citing section 40(2) (personal information) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOJ was entitled to apply section 40(2) to refuse the request. The Commissioner requires no steps as a result of this notice.Keywords: Court case
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Ministry of Justice
7 Jul 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested details of any preparatory work held by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) that relates to the “Growth Plan 2022” delivered in Parliament on 23 September 2022, by the then Chancellor, Kwasi Kwarteng. The OBR confirmed that it held one document, a note sent to the Chancellor on 6 September 2022, that it considered to be relevant to the request. However, the OBR refused to release this information, citing section 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) – inhibition to the free and frank provision of advice and exchange of views - of FOIA. The Commissioner has decided that whilst the exemption at section 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) is engaged, the public interest favours disclosure of the requested information in this instance. The Commissioner requires the OBR to release a copy of the note sent to the Chancellor on 6 September 2022.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View Office for Budget Responsibility
7 Jul 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on evaluation and scoring of certain questions relating to a prison procurement. NHS England refused the request on the basis of section 12 – that it would exceed the appropriate cost limit to comply. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS England has correctly applied section 12 to refuse the request and has provided advice and assistance under section 16 of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View NHS England