8 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Dover District Council (the Council) relating to a specific planning application. The Council disclosed some information within the scope of the request; however, it withheld some information under regulation 12(4)(e) of the EIR, the internal communications exception. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(e) (internal communications) of the EIR to refuse to provide the withheld information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e)
View Dover District Council
8 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested various pieces of information about officers and staff at two named police stations from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”). The MPS has advised that to ascertain whether or not it holds the requested information would exceed the cost limit, citing section 12(2) of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that it was entitled to do so. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View Metropolitan Police Service
7 Jun 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(1)
View NHS England
7 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information regarding dog breading and selling licences for a specific business. Warrington Borough Council (“the Council”) refused the request citing section 12(1) (cost of compliance) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA, in response to the whole of the request. It has also complied with its duty to provide advice and assistance in line with the requirements of section 16 of FOIA. However, the Council breached section 10 of FOIA as it failed to respond to the request within 20 working days of its receipt. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1)
View Warrington Council
7 Jun 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to a landowner statement. The above public authority’s final position was to rely on regulations 12(5)(b) – course of justice – regulation 12(4)(d) – material in the course of completion – and regulation 12(4)(e) – internal communications – of the EIR to withhold information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has correctly relied on regulation 12(5)(b) to withhold some of the information and the balance of the public interest favours maintaining this exception. Most of the information also engages regulation 12(4)(e) and, where it does, the Commissioner is satisfied that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining that exception. None of the information engages regulation 12(4)(d). There is a small quantity of emails that do not engage any exception and must therefore be disclosed. The public authority also breached regulations 11 and 14 of the EIR in its handling of the request. The Commissioner requi
Exemptions cited: EIR 11; EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 12(4)(e); EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 14
View Bristol City Council
7 Jun 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to a planning application. The council disclosed some information and confirmed that further information was not held. The complainant believes that further information may be held by the council. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the council disclosed all of the relevant information to the complainant that it holds and that regulation 12(4)(a) applies but that it failed to carry out an internal review within the statutory time limit and breached regulation 11(4). The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(4)(a)
View Manchester City Council
7 Jun 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to a telecommunications mast in Hazlerigg. Newcastle City Council (the Council) ultimately provided the information it holds that falls within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council breached section 10(1) of FOIA by failing to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Newcastle City Council
7 Jun 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made a request for information to Oadby and Wigston Borough Council (the Council), regarding Council tax enforcement and a copy of reports. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was not entitled to rely on section 12(1) when refusing this request. The Commissioner requires the Council 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
View Oadby and Wigston Borough Council
7 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (“PSNI”) for information relating to its interactions with Interpol.The Commissioner’s decision is that PSNI correctly relied upon section 40(5)(b)(a)(i) of FOIA to refuse to confirm or deny whether it held the information falling within scope of question one of the request.The Commissioner does not require further steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(5)(b)(a)(i)
View Police Service of Northern Ireland
7 Jun 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from the London Borough of Southwark (the Council), relating to correspondences regarding the Quality Homes Investment Programme (QHIP).The Commissioner is satisfied that the Council was entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) when refusing this request.The Commissioner has also decided that the Council breached regulation 5(2) by not responding to the request within 20 working days.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b); EIR 5(2)
View Southwark Council
7 Jun 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to various named sewage treatment works. South West Water disclosed some of the requested information, however it refused to disclose the remainder, citing regulation 12(5)(b) as a basis for non-disclosure.The Commissioner’s decision is that South West Water is entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(b) – the course of justice, to withhold the requested information. He also finds that South West Water has breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR.The Commissioner does not require South West Water to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 5(2)
View South West Water
6 Jun 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about “yellow card” reporting on Covid-19 vaccinations. The above public authority relied on section 12 of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has failed to demonstrate that section 12 of FOIA is engaged and consequently is not entitled to rely on this exemption to refuse the request. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a fresh response, to the request, that does not rely on either section 12 or section 14 of FOIA. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal FTT EA/2023/0329 consent order.
Keywords/themes: failure to provide submissions
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
6 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about costs associated with a team’s relocation. The BBC explained that the information is derogated and excluded from FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the BBC holds the information for the purposes of ‘journalism, art or literature’. The information is therefore not covered by FOIA, and the BBC does not need to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
View BBC
6 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested, from the London Borough of Haringey (‘the council’), correspondence between a named councillor and the council’s Monitoring Officer. The council refused the request on the basis that section 42 of FOIA applied (legal professional privilege). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to apply section 42 to withhold the information from disclosure. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 42(1)
View Haringey Council
6 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about an incident that occurred at a kennels facility in 2009, from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”). The MPS advised that it does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, no information is held. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Metropolitan Police Service
6 Jun 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a copy of the full external CCN report from Swansea Bay University Health Board (‘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
6 Jun 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about appointments to a senior role at Tarleton Academy, part of the Endeavour Learning Trust (the Trust). The Trust refused the request by referring to third party personal data. At internal review, the Trust cited section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious request). The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was not vexatious. The Commissioner requires the Trust to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.Issue a fresh response to the complainant, which does not relyon section 14(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View ENDEAVOUR LEARNING TRUST
5 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested flow data relating to sewage systems. The above public authority relied on regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has correctly relied on regulation 12(5)(b) and that the public interest favours maintaining the exception. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0315 appeal allowed.Keywords: sewage inquiry
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View Northumbrian Water
5 Jun 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested clinical targets relating to the University’s dental course. The University withheld the requested information, citing section 43(2) (commercial interests). The Commissioner’s decision is that section 43(2) is not engaged. The Commissioner requires the University to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the withheld information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43(2)
View The University of Sheffield
5 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the evaluation strategy for the discovery phase of Managed Migration. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) provided some information which it considered fell within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that DWP does not hold any further information to that already provided to the complainant. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Department for Work and Pensions
5 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the remuneration of the Independent Assessor of Complaints (IAC). The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) refused to provide the requested information, citing section 40(2) (personal information) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the CPS was entitled to apply section 40(2) in this case. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Crown Prosecution Service
5 Jun 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to assessing the impact of the Nationality and Borders Act on the asylum decision-making process. The Home Office refused to provide the requested information, citing sections 22(1) (information intended for future publication) and 35(1)(a) (formulation of government policy) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office correctly engaged section 35 and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. However, he finds that section 22 is not engaged. He also finds that the Home Office breached section 10 (time for compliance) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Home Office to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the information withheld by virtue of section 22(1) to the complainant. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/0332 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 22; FOI 35
View Home Office
5 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested various information between Wealdon District Council (the ‘Council’) and the developers at Old Marshfoot Farm. The Council refused the request citing regulation 12(5)(b) (the course of justice) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (the ‘EIR’). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(b) to refuse the request.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View Wealden District Council
5 Jun 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 Ministry of Defence
5 Jun 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested correspondence between the London Borough of Havering, Transport for London, and the Mayor of London’s Office regarding the ULEZ expansion. The London Borough of Havering (“the Council”) stated the information was already publicly available, citing Regulation 6(1)(b) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that Regulation 6(1)(b) is not engaged. The Commissioner requires the Council to provide a fresh response to the complainant without reliance on Regulation 6(1)(b).
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 6(1)(b)
View London Borough of Havering
5 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from two specified reviews relating to offenders, including sex offenders. The Home Office provided the information pertaining to an independent review but refused to provide the requested information for that pertaining to the Home Office’s own internal review. The Home Office cited section 31(1)(a) of FOIA (the exemption for the prevention or detection of crime) and section 35(1)(a) (the exemption for the formulation or development of government policy). The complainant was only concerned with the withheld information relating to the internal review part (part 1) of his request. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the Home Office additionally relied on section 40(2) of FOIA (the exemption for personal information). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office was entitled to rely on section 35(1)(a) to refuse part 1 of the request. As he has determined that section 35(1)(a) is engaged, the Commissioner has not found it n
Exemptions cited: FOI 35
View Home Office
5 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested data relating to sewage spills. The above public authority relied on regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR (course of justice) to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has correctly relied on regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR to withhold the information and the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exception. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.Keywords: sewage inquiry
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View South West Water
2 Jun 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information held by the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (the council) relating to the stopping up of a particular highway. The Commissioner is satisfied that the council is entitled to withhold some of the requested information under regulation 5(3) – personal data, and regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR – course of justice. The Commissioner also considers that the exception at regulation 12(4)(e) of the EIR - internal communications, is engaged; however, he has found that the public interest favours the disclosure of part of the information that is subject to this exception. As the council failed to issue a refusal notice within 20 working days, and failed to carry out an internal review within 40 working days, the Commissioner has found a breach of regulation 14(2) and 11(4) of the EIR, respectively. The Commissioner requires the council to disclose the information highlighted within the confidential annex attached to this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(4)(e); EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 14(2); EIR 5(3)
View Richmond upon Thames Council
2 Jun 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to an outbreak of E.coli. The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) refused to provide the information, citing section 22 of FOIA – future publication. The Commissioner’s decision is that the UKHSA correctly applied section 22 of FOIA to parts 1-7 of the request. However, regarding parts 8, 9 and 10, the UKHSA has breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 22
View UK Health Security Agency
2 Jun 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Bristol City Council (the Council) about a community order against named dog owners.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council should have relied on section 40(5B) of FOIA to refuse to confirm or deny whether any information was held and has applied this exemption himself proactively. The Commissioner also finds that the Council breached section 10(1) of FOIA as it failed to provide its response within the statutory 20 working days.The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 40(5)
View Bristol City Council
2 Jun 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of then-Secretary of State Liz Truss MP’s ministerial diary. The above public authority refused the request as vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority is not entitled to rely on section 14 of FOIA to refuse the request. It also breached section 10 of FOIA by failing to respond to the request within 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a fresh response, to the request, that does not rely on section 14(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 14
View Department for Business and Trade
2 Jun 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested copies of contracts. The above public authority provided some information but the complainant believes more is held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the public authority has disclosed all the information it holds. The public authority breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR as it failed to respond to the request within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.Keywords: Equinor, partnership
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2)
View University of Durham
2 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from BEIS a copy of the text message sent from David Cameron to Nadeem Zahawi referenced in the Office of the Registrar of Consultants Lobbyists (ORCL) investigation.The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the public authority did not hold any further information falling within the scope of the requests.The Commissioner does not require BEIS to take any further steps in this case.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1)
View Department for Business and Trade
2 Jun 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) is entitled to withhold the requested correspondence between Matt Hancock and Michelle Mone under section 23(1) of FOIA. This is because the information relates to a body dealing with security matters. DHSC’s late reliance on section 23 (and section 31) means that it did not comply with the timescale for refusing a request set out under section 17(1).It is not necessary for DHSC to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 23
View Department of Health and Social Care
1 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a meta-request to HM Treasury (“HMT”) for all internal and external correspondence and communications about the handling of a previous information request. HMT refused the request under section 14(1) (vexatious requests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was vexatious and therefore HMT was entitled to rely upon section 14(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this decision. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0316 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View HM Treasury
1 Jun 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about a Community Panel and a Resident Liaison Group. The University of Exeter (‘the University’) disclosed the majority of the requested information and withheld the names and job titles of the group members under section 40 and 41 of FOIA. These exemptions concern personal data and information provided in confidence respectively. The Commissioner’s decision is that the University correctly applied section 40(2) to the majority of the requested information but incorrectly applied both section 40(2) and section 41(1) to the name of the Community Panel Chair. The Commissioner requires the University to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. The complainant has the name of the Community Panel Chair through the associated Terms of Reference that the University disclosed to them. However, the University should disclose the Chair’s name where it appears in the redacted Community Panel meeting minutes that the University a
Exemptions cited: FOI 40; FOI 41
View The University of Exeter
1 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about a variety of topics relating to Great Waldingfield Parish Council (the Council). The Council disclosed some information in response to the request.The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council holds no further recorded information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further step on this matter.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
1 Jun 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to his family from the Home Office. The Home Office advised the complainant that no information is held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, the Home Office holds no recorded information within the scope of the request. No steps are required as a result of this notice. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0291 appeal struck out. Information tribunal UA-2024-000131-GIA UTA PTA refused.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Home Office
1 Jun 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Atomic Weapons Establishment Plc (“AWE”) for information relating to the blood and urine samples of servicemen or civilian employees who took part in nuclear testing between 1952 and 1967.The Commissioner’s decision is that the AWE was entitled to refuse the request under section 12(1) of FOIA. However, the Commissioner finds that AWE did not comply with its obligations under section 16(1) of FOIA to offer advice and assistance, and in failing to provide its refusal notice within 20 working days, AWE breached section 17(5).The Commissioner requires AWE to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation:• Provide the complainant with advice and assistance to help them submit a request falling within the appropriate limit.AWE must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16(1); FOI 17(5)
View Atomic Weapons Establishment
31 May 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information regarding the number of reports of anti-social behaviour in a specific area over a period of three years. Wiltshire Council (“the Council”) disclosed some information within scope of the request; however, it withheld some information under regulation 12(3) (personal information) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on regulation 12(3) of the EIR to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(3)
View Wiltshire Council
31 May 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested evidence from a school inspection. The above public authority relied on section 33 (audit functions) and section 40(2) of FOIA (personal data) to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has correctly relied on section 33 of FOIA and that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. He is also satisfied that the public authority was entitled to rely on section 40(2) of FOIA in the manner that it has. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 33; FOI 40
View Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills
31 May 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)
31 May 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 Sussex Partnership NHS Trust
31 May 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from the above public authority (‘the public authority’), information about a named charity (‘the charity’). The public authority’s final position was to refuse to disclose any information within scope of the request, citing sections 31(1)(g), 40(2) and 41 of FOIA (the exemptions for ‘law enforcement’, ‘personal information’ and ‘information provided in confidence’ respectively). The Commissioner’s decision is that section 31(1)(g) is engaged and should be maintained. He has also found that the public authority breached section 17(1) of FOIA as it did not refuse the request within the required timeframe. The Commissioner does not require any further steps as a result of this decision notice. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/0313 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 31(1)(g)
View The Charity Commission
31 May 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested University Council minutes in which his cases have been discussed. The University of Southampton (“the University”) provided excerpts from the minutes. The Commissioner’s decision is that the University has provided the information it holds in scope of the request and as such has complied with its obligations under section 1 of FOIA. He requires no steps. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0293 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View University of Southampton
31 May 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested copies of all correspondence between Historic England, Bristol City Council and Bristol Zoological Society, regarding a planning application for the former zoo car park. He also asked for notes of any meetings that had taken place between the parties. Historic England disclosed all the information it held, with redactions for personal data. The Commissioner’s decision is that Historic England was entitled to apply regulation 13(1) of the EIR to withhold the personal data (ie the names and contact details of non-senior employees). However, he finds that Historic England breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR by failing to disclose all the information it held within 20 working days. It also breached regulation 11(2) of the EIR by failing to conduct an internal review within 40 working days.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(2); EIR 13(1); EIR 5(2)
View Historic England
31 May 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to Hertfordshire County Council’s (the Council) Minerals and Waste Plan 2040. The Council refused to comply with the request under regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR (exception for manifestly unreasonable requests). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR to refuse to comply with the request. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
View Hertfordshire County Council
31 May 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about a member of academic staff. The School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) advised it does not hold some of the requested information, it disclosed some, directed the complainant to relevant information that is already published and applied section 40(2) of FOIA to the remainder. Section 40(2) concerns information that is personal data. The Commissioner’s decision is that SOAS is entitled to apply section 40(2) of FOIA to the information it is withholding. It is another individual’s personal data and disclosing it would not be lawful. It is not necessary for SOAS to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
31 May 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested a spreadsheet breaking down the CO2 emissions savings of policies published in the net zero strategy. DESNZ refused the request and withheld the information in reliance of EIR regulation 12(4)(e) – internal communications. The Commissioner’s decision is that the exception at EIR regulation 12(4)(e) is appropriately engaged and the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exception. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e)
View Department for Energy Security and Net Zero
31 May 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about Action Fraud from City of London Police (“COLP”). COLP provided some information, but refused the remainder citing sections 31(1)(a) and (b)(Law enforcement) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that COLP was entitled to rely on the exemptions cited. No steps are required. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0312 appeal dismissed. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0156 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View City of London Police