27 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested departmental communications concerning the Government’s rebuttal response to a Sunday Times article about the Government response to the emerging Covid-19 pandemic in early 2020. The Cabinet Office maintained that of the information held concerning this matter, only one email fell within the scope of the complainant’s request and that this information was withheld under section 36(2)(b)(ii)(prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) of the FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office wrongly interpreted the scope of the request and that all of the related information held is within scope of the request. The Commissioner is satisfied that all of the information held is exempt under section 36(2)(b)(ii) but considers that the balance of the public interest favours disclosure of the information.The Commissioner requires the Cabinet Office to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation:• Disclose all of the emai
Exemptions cited: FOI 36(2)(b)(ii)
View Cabinet Office
27 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Hampshire Constabulary (“the Police”) regarding the number of incidents attended by the Police at a named hotel in the past 48 months. The Police refused to confirm or deny whether relevant information is held and applied section 30(3) of FOIA (Investigations and Proceedings) to neither confirm nor deny holding the requested information.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Police were entitled to apply the exemption at section 30(3) of FOIA to the request to neither confirm nor deny holding the requested information, and that the public interest lies with maintaining the exemption.The Commissioner does not require the Police to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30
27 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested various information in respect of an Accessibility Email Group (the AEG) from Transport for Wales (TfW). TfW confirmed that it did not hold some information and refused the remainder of the request on the basis of section 40(2) (personal information), section 41 (information provided in confidence), and section 21 (information accessible to the applicant by other means) FOIA. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, TfW disclosed redacted copies of some of the emails to the complainant. The Commissioner’s decision is that TfW has complied with its obligations under section 1(1) FOIA and that it was entitled to rely on section 40(2), section 41 and section 21 for the information it does hold. However, its failure to disclose the redacted copies of some of the emails until recently, represents a breach of section 10(1) FOIA. Additionally, the Commissioner has also recorded a breach of section 17(1) as a result of TfW’s failure to issue its refusal
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10(1); FOI 17; FOI 21; FOI 40(2); FOI 41
View Transport for Wales Rail
27 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested emails from Sheffield City Council (the Council) relating to the ‘NUM building’. The Council provided some information but withheld the remainder citing sections 36(2) (prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs), 40(2) (personal information), 42 (legal professional privilege) and 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner has investigated its application of sections 36, 42 and 43. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has failed to provide sufficient evidence to support the engagement of those exemptions. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the withheld information to the requester, redacted to avoid disclosure of personal information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36; FOI 40; FOI 42; FOI 43
View Sheffield City Council
27 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information regarding deep sea mineral exploration licences. The department formerly known as the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (“BEIS”) relied on the exception at EIR regulation 12(5)(e) – confidentiality of commercial or industrial information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority is entitled to rely on the exception to withhold the annual reports held by BEIS, which the Commissioner considers forms part of the requested information, and the public interest favours maintaining the exception. The Commissioner finds a breach of regulation 5(2) regarding the delay in responding to the request. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take the any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 5(2)
View Department for Business and Trade
27 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information within the Home Office guidance in its ‘Knowledge Base’ on aligning names on foreign documents in relation to all current EU-countries. The Home Office withheld the requested information relying on the section 22(1) FOIA exemption (Information intended for future publication). The Commissioner’s decision is that the section 22(1) FOIA had been correctly applied. The Commissioner did not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 22
View Home Office
27 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested various sets of information held by South Yorkshire Police (SYP) about an investigation into a serious offence which was committed in 2018. Whilst SYP provided information in response to part of the request, it refused the remaining elements, citing section 30(1)(a) – investigations and proceedings, and section 40(2) – personal data of third parties, of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that SYP is entitled to rely on section 30(1)(a) of FOIA as its basis for refusing all parts of the request (with the exception of that part where it has already released the information). First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0224 appeal withdrawn.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30(1)
View South Yorkshire Police
27 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Endeavour Learning Trust correctly categorised the applicant’s information request about staff appointments as a vexatious request under section 14(1) of FOIA. It is not necessary for Endeavour Learning Trust to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
27 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about complaints made against John Peel (aka John Robert Parker Ravenscroft) between 1 January 1967 and 25 October 2004. The BBC confirmed under section 1(1)(a) FOIA that on the balance of probabilities it did not hold the requested information. However in the internal review the BBC did explain the limitations of the searches it had conducted but confirmed to conduct further searches would exceed the cost limit under section 12 FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 12 FOIA would be applicable in this case as it would exceed the cost limit for the BBC to determine whether or not information is held falling within the scope of the request. However the BBC breached section 16 and 17(5) FOIA in the handling of this request. The Commissioner requires the BBC to comply with its obligations under section 16 FOIA in relation to this request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16; FOI 17
View BBC
27 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information concerning the Clearing House function of the Cabinet Office. The Cabinet Office initially refused the request under section 12 (cost limit) of the FOIA. Following a refined request from the complainant the Cabinet Office provided information requested in part 5 of the request; advised that they held no information within parts 1, 2 and 4 of the request, and withheld information requested in part 3 of the request under sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (c)(prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs).The Commissioner’s decision is that he is satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the Cabinet Office do not hold any information requested in parts 1, 2 and 4 of the request. The Commissioner is satisfied that sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (c) are engaged to part 3 of the request but that in respect of some of the information held, the public interest in disclosure outweighs the public interest in maintaining the exemptions. The Commissioner re
Exemptions cited: FOI 36(2)(b)(i); FOI 36(2)(c)
View Cabinet Office
27 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the trust to disclose an investigation report into the conduct of a junior member of staff. The trust disclosed some information and parts of the report, but felt the remainder is exempt from disclosure under section 40 of FOIA. For three questions, it refused to comply and cited section 12 of FOIA, as it considered the cost to comply would exceed the cost limit. The Commissioner’s decision is that the trust is entitled to rely on sections 12 and 40 of FOIA. He has however found the trust in breach of sections 1, 10 and 17 of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further action to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 17; FOI 40
View North Cumbria Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust
27 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested a complete copy of a letter dated 12 April 2002 sent from The (then) Prince of Wales to Prime Minister Tony Blair, and any correspondence or communications relating to the letter between Prime Minister Blair and The Prince of Wales or between Prime Minister Blair and Alistair Campbell/Margaret Beckett.The Cabinet Office initially confirmed that they held the letter requested and a copy of a reply from Prime Minister Blair. They confirmed that they did not hold any other requested correspondence or communications relating to the letter. With regard to the information held that was environmental, the Cabinet Office advised that this was exempt from disclosure under regulation 13(1)(third party personal data) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR). With regard to the information held that was non-environmental, the Cabinet Office advised that this was exempt from disclosure under sections 37(1)(aa)(communications with or on behalf of the heir
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1); FOI 37(1)(aa)
View Cabinet Office
27 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The Commissioner’s decision is that Herefordshire Council (‘the Council’) is entitled to withhold some of the information in a report about the River Lugg catchment under regulations 12(4)(d), and 13 of the EIR. These exceptions concern material still in the course of completion and personal data respectively. It is not necessary for the Council to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 13
View Herefordshire Council
27 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the British Museum is entitled to withhold the requested information about funding by fossil fuel companies under section 43(2) of FOIA and that the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. It is not necessary for the British Museum to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View British Museum
27 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested specific legal advice. London Borough of Croydon (‘the Council’) refused to provide the requested information, citing regulation 12(5)(b) (the course of justice and enquiries). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was correct to withhold the requested information under regulation 12(5)(b). The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal EA/2023/0177 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View London Borough of Croydon
24 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about action taken by Prime Minister David Cameron to address an 11% pay increase recommended by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA). The Cabinet Office confirmed that they held information within the scope of the request but that the information was exempt from disclosure in its entirety under sections 35(1)(a), (b) and (d)(formulation or development of government policy). During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the Cabinet Office withdrew their reliance on section 35(1)(d)(operation of any Ministerial private office) and confirmed that they were applying section 36 (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) in the alternative to section 35(1)(a). The Commissioner’s decision is that section 35(1)(a) is engaged to the entirety of the withheld information but that the balance of the public interest favours disclosure of the information.The Commissioner requires that the Cabinet Office take the follo
Exemptions cited: FOI 35(1)(a)
View Cabinet Office
24 Mar 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 NHS England
24 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the total number of digital and/or written messages, broken down by platform (e.g. email, WhatsApp, Twitter etc) sent by Dominic Cummings on 7 September 2020 in his capacity as Chief (Special) Adviser to Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The Cabinet Office confirmed that they did not hold the information requested, a position which was upheld at internal review and maintained in submissions to the Commissioner.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office failed to carry out checks and searches for the requested information at the time of the request, and based on the information available to him at the time of his investigation, the Commissioner considers, on the balance of probabilities, that the Cabinet Office will have held the information requested at the time of the request.Unfortunately, Mr Cummings’ subsequent departure from the Government, and the passage of time since the request, means that the information requested will no longer be held b
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1)
View Cabinet Office
24 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Lichfield District Council information relating to the selection of an event organiser. The Council withheld the requested information under section 43(2) (Commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has failed to demonstrate that section 43(2) is engaged. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the withheld information, ensuring that any personal data is redacted subject to the terms of the Data Protection Act 2018.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43(2)
View Lichfield District Council
24 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a request for the vaccine damage payment scheme medical assessor's GMC number, qualifications, and experience and a copy of the VDPS guidance the medical assessors follow. NHS Business Services Authority (NHS BSA) provided the VDPS guidance the medical assessors follow with some redactions which are not in dispute, it has confirmed it does not hold the medical assessor’s qualifications/experience and it has withheld the medical assessor’s GMC numbers under section 40(2) FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 40(2) FOIA was applied correctly by NHS BSA in this case to withhold the medical assessor’s GMC number and that NHS BSA does not hold the medical assessor’s qualifications/experience under section 1(1)(a) FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 40
View NHS Business Services Authority
24 Mar 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 Merseyside Police
24 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of an internal report. University College London (‘the University’) withheld the report in its entirety, citing section 36(2)(b)(ii) and 36(2)(c) (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs). The Commissioner’s decision is that the report engages section 36(2)(b)(ii) and the public interest lies in maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal EA/2023/0276 FTT appeal allowed in part.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36(2)(b)(ii)
View University College London
23 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the disciplinary / complaint records of a deceased police officer from South Yorkshire Police (“SYP”). SYP refused to provide the requested information citing sections 31(1)(g) (Law enforcement) and 38(1)(a) (Health and safety) of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that SYP was entitled to rely on section 31 to withhold the requested information. No steps are required. Information Tribunal FTT EA/2023/0171 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View South Yorkshire Police
23 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to a decision made by Mid Devon District Council (the Council) to increase the amount of a loan which it had provided to 3 Rivers Developments Limited (3 Rivers). The Council considered the request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). It provided some information in response to the request, and directed the complainant to where other information could be found on its website.The Commissioner’s decision is that the request is for environmental information, and should therefore have been considered under the EIR. However, the Commissioner is satisfied that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council has provided all the information held that falls within the scope of the request, and has complied with its obligations under regulation 5(1) of the EIR. However, as the Council failed to provide the information which it held within 20 working days, it has breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR. The Commissioner requires no steps
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2)
View Mid Devon District Council
23 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (‘the DLUHC’), permission under the RPSI for to re-use its Energy Performance of Buildings Data. The DLUHC responded addressing his rights and obligations to re-use information under the open government licence. The complainant therefore argues that the DLUHC has failed to provide him with an adequate response to his request under the RPSI. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DLUHC did not comply with the requirements of the RPSI. The Commissioner requires the DLUHC to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. To respond to the complainant’s request as required by the RPSI.
Exemptions cited: RPSI 8
View Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
23 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested correspondence involving the Minister for Sport or the Secretary of State for then Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, now Department for Culture, Media and Sport (“DCMS”) regarding the European Super League from 12 – 30 April 2021 inclusive. DCMS responded after the Commissioner served a Decision Notice requiring it to do so. It refused to provide the requested information and cited provisions of section 36 (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) as its basis for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that DCMS is entitled to rely on section 36 as its basis for withholding the requested information. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View Department for Culture, Media and Sport
23 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from London Borough of Haringey (“the Council”) relating to a valuation report and details of various board meetings. The Council disclosed some of the requested information, however it refused to disclose the remainder citing sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) and 43(2) as a basis for non-disclosure. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly applied the exemptions.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36; FOI 43
View Haringey Council
23 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a two-part request for information about use of software supplied by Dataminr. The above public authority relied on sections 41 (breach of confidence) and 43 of FOIA (commercial interests) to withhold information within the scope of part 1 and a number of exemptions to withhold information within the scope of part 2. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority is entitled to rely on section 43 of FOIA to withhold the information within the scope of part 1 of the request and that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining that exemption. In relation to part 2, some of the withheld information engages section 23 of FOIA. The remainder engages section 24 of FOIA and the balance of the public interest favours maintaining this exemption. The Cabinet Office breached section 17 of FOIA in dealing with this request because it took an unreasonable amount of time to consider the balance of the public interest. The Commissioner does not require furthe
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 23; FOI 24; FOI 43
View Cabinet Office
22 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the Cabinet Office the names, times and roles of all persons in attendance at 10 Downing Street on 18 December 2020. The Cabinet Office refused the request under section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious requests). The Commissioner’s decision is that, at the statutory time for compliance, the Cabinet Office was not entitled to rely on section 14(1) of FOIA to refuse to provide the requested information. However, in the particular circumstances of this case, the Commissioner has exercised his discretion and does not require the Cabinet Office to take any steps. Even if he had ordered the Cabinet Office to respond to the request again, without relying upon section 14(1) of FOIA, the Commissioner’s decision is that the withheld information relating to the junior employees would engage section 40(2) of FOIA as it is the personal data of other individuals and disclosure would be unlawful.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1); FOI 40(2)
View Cabinet Office
22 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested statistics relating to vulnerable customers and their payment of energy bills. EDF Energy PLC (EDF) accepted that it was subject to the EIR, but stated that the requested information was not environmental.The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is not environmental information and therefore EDF is not obliged to provide it under the EIR.As the information is not environmental and EDF is not a public authority for the purposes of FOIA, the Commissioner is unable to order any remedial steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 2(1)
22 Mar 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 Manchester City Council
22 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about an investigation into alleged wrongdoing regarding a benefit they claimed from the Department for Work and Pensions (“DWP”). The Commissioner’s decision is that DWP was entitled to rely on section 40(5A) of FOIA (personal data) to refuse to confirm or deny that it held any relevant information. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(5)(a)
View Department for Work and Pensions
22 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested from Bar Hill Parish Council (the Council) information regarding conifer trees at Saxon Park. The Council provided the complainant with information – a copy of the Saxon Park Tree Survey, but with information redacted. The Council cited section 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA to the withheld information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the information is environmental, and the Council should have considered the request under the EIR on receipt of the request and not under FOIA. In view of this, the Commissioner has recorded a breach of regulation 14(3) (refusal notices) of the EIR.The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• The Council must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the EIR.The Council must take this step within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making writte
Exemptions cited: EIR 14(3)
22 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to planning applications. Kingsley Parish Council (the Council) provided some information and said that no further information was held. The Commissioner is satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the Council does not hold any further information relevant to the request. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5
22 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of particular emails from the Home Office. The Home Office cited section 12(1) (Cost of compliance) of FOIA to refuse the request.The Commissioner’s decision is that some of the request is for personal information and that the Home Office should have cited section 40(5B)(a)(i) (Personal information) to refuse to confirm or deny whether the information is held. In respect of the remainder, he finds that the Home Office properly relied on section 12(1) and that there was no breach of section 16 (Advice and assistance) of FOIA. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16; FOI 40
View Home Office
22 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has asked for information setting out why the CQC is not allowed to investigate individual complaints. The CQC has stated no recorded information is held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the CQC does not hold the information requested and has complied with its obligations under section 1(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View CQC
22 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested detailed information about what happens to the recyclable materials, following their collection by the local authorities, namely Brent Council (BC). More specifically, the complainant wanted to know how the recyclates are being processed, what products are made from the recycled materials, which facilities are used for the recycling and the information relating to the number of employees at the facility. The complainant also asked whether the recyclable materials are being sold to other companies and who receives the money. BC provided some information in response to the two requests submitted, but explained that it did not hold some of the information sought. For such information, BC cited regulation 12(4)(a) (information not held) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on balance of probabilities, the public authority did not hold any further information falling within the scope of the requests, beyond that provided to the complainant.
The
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
View London Borough of Brent
22 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the Canal and River Trust (the Trust) information relating to a disputed invoice.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust should have relied on section 40(5A) of FOIA to refuse to confirm or deny whether any information was held and has applied this exemption himself proactively.The Commissioner does not require the Trust to take any steps as a result of this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(5)
View Canal and River Trust
22 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a four-part request, each of which contained multiple sub-parts, for information relating to chapter 20 of the book titled “Exact Solutions in Three-Dimensional Gravity” (the Book) by A.A Garcia-Diaz. Cambridge University Press & Assessment (Cambridge) refused to comply with the request, citing section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious request). The Commissioner’s decision is that Cambridge was entitled to rely on section 14(1) of FOIA to refuse the request because the request was vexatious. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2023/0213 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
22 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the departure of the previous Chief Executive (“CEO"). Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (“SMBC”) supplied some information, but withheld information related to payments, using section 22 of FOIA (Information intended for future public publication). It also refused to confirm or deny holding information within the scope of some parts of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that SMBC is entitled to rely on section 40(5B) (Personal Data) in the manner that it has done. The Commissioner has found that SMBC is not entitled to rely on section 22 to withhold information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Disclose the total payment made to the outgoing CEO. 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
Exemptions cited: FOI 22; FOI 40(5) (1)
View Sandwell Council
21 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about stats and briefings produced relating to three policy areas. The Department of Work and Pensions (“DWP”) refused the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, in respect of part [1] of the request, DWP has breached section 1(1) of FOIA by failing to confirm what information is held within scope of the request. The Commissioner also finds that DWP has not complied with section 17(5) of FOIA as it did not provide the complainant with a refusal notice stating which exemptions it is relying on to refuse the request. Furthermore, the Commissioner finds that, while the exemption is not explicitly stated within DWP’s responses to both the complainant and the Commissioner, DWP has not sufficiently demonstrated that section 12(1) is engaged therefore it is not entitled to rely on the exemption to refuse the request. The Commissioner requires DWP to issue the complainant with a fresh response to part [1] of the request that does not rely on sec
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1); FOI 12(1); FOI 17(5)
View Department for Work and Pensions
21 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on the processing of a particular FOI request made by a third party. The public authority formerly known as the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (“BEIS”) relied on the exemptions at FOIA section 35(1)(d) – information relating to the operation of any Ministerial office, section 36(2)(b) & (c) – prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs and section 40(2) – personal information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority is entitled to engage section 35(1)(d) and section 36(2)(b) and (c) to withhold the requested information, however the public interest favours disclosure. He considers that section 40(2) has been appropriately applied to the redactions in the limited information disclosed to the complainant. He would expect the same redactions to be made when disclosing any further information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with t
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 35; FOI 36; FOI 40
View Department for Energy Security and Net Zero
21 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS) seeking communications between DCMS and Nominet UK for a two week period in February/March 2022. DCMS disclosed some information but sought to withhold the remainder on the basis of sections 35(1)(a) (formulation or development of government policy), 40(2) (personal data) and 41(1) (information provided in confidence) of FOIA. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation DCMS disclosed further information to the complainant under FOIA. The only remaining disputed information has been withheld on the basis of section 41(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 41(1) does not apply the remaining disputed information. The Commissioner has also found that DCMS breached section 10(1) by failing to respond to the request within 20 working days. (The decision notice is served on the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology as the department which now has resp
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 41(1)
View Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
21 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested copies of internal reports. The above public authority had failed to respond at the date of this notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Regulation 5(2) of the Environmental Information Regulations. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a substantive response, under the EIR, to the request.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View South Kesteven District Council
21 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the distance learning department. The above public authority initially withheld some information but disclosed it during the course of the investigation. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority provided some non-exempt information outside of the 20 day timeframe and therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View BRIDGWATER & TAUNTON COLLEGE TRUST
21 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Cabinet Office seeking information about the cost of repainting two aircraft in the union flag livery.After some delay, the Cabinet Office disclosed some of the requested information but sought to withhold the remainder of the information on the basis of section 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA. During the Commissioner’s investigation the Cabinet Office also disclosed the information initially withheld on the basis of section 43(2).The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office breached sections 10(1) and 17(1) of FOIA as result of its initial delayed response and further breached section 10(1) by failing to disclose the disputed information within 20 working days. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 17
View Cabinet Office
21 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested distributional and equality analyses associated with the Spring Statement 2022. HM Treasury (HMT) withheld the information citing section 35(1)(a). During the Commissioner’s investigation, HMT confirmed that due to the passage of time, it was content to disclose some of the requested information. Following this, the complainant disputed that HMT had identified all of the information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, HMT has identified all of the information falling within the scope of the request. He also finds that HMT is entitled to rely on section 35(1)(a) to withhold the remaining information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 35
View HM Treasury
21 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested for a copy of all reports submitted by external investigators, relating to claims of racial discrimination and unfair treatment at the British Council, the week commencing 15 November 2021.
The British Council (the Council) withheld the requested information citing section 40(2) (personal information).The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust was entitled to withhold the requested information under section 40(2). The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View British Council
21 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) does not hold the requested information about a review carried out by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. DWP has complied with section 1(1)(a) of FOIA but breached section 10(1) as it did not comply with section 1(1) within 20 working days of receiving the request. It is not necessary for DWP to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Department for Work and Pensions
21 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information regarding the development consent application for Wylfa Newydd Nuclear Power Station in Anglesey. The Commissioner’s decision is that the department formerly known as the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (“BEIS”) is not entitled to rely on the exception at regulation 12(4)(d) – material in the course of completion. He considers that the exception at regulation 12(4)(e) – internal communication - is engaged, however the public interest favours disclosure of information in the scope of the request. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the information as set out in the confidential annex.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 FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court. Information Tribunal appeal UA
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 12(4)(e)
View Department for Energy Security and Net Zero