13 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (“BEIS”) relating to the strategy document ‘Working safely during coronavirus (COVID-19)’. BEIS refused to comply with the requested citing section 12 (cost limit) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that BEIS was entitled to reuse to comply with the request in accordance with section 12(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner also finds that BEIS did not comply with its obligations at section 16 to offer advice and assistance. However, appropriate advice and assistance has been provided via BEIS’s response to the Commissioner’s investigation. The Commissioner does not require BEIS to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16
View Department for Business and Trade
13 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (“BEIS”) relating to the strategy document ‘Working safely during coronavirus (COVID-19)’. BEIS refused to comply with the requested citing section 12 (cost limit) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that BEIS was entitled to reuse to comply with the request in accordance with section 12(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner also finds that BEIS did not comply with its obligations at section 16 to offer advice and assistance. However, appropriate advice and assistance has been provided via BEIS’s response to the Commissioner’s investigation. The Commissioner does not require BEIS to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16
View Department for Business and Trade
13 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Cornwall Council (“the Council”) about a planning application. The Council provided some information within the scope of the request but refused to provide the remainder, citing the exception under regulation 12(5)(f) of the EIR (adversely affect the interests of the person who provided the information). During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the Council confirmed that some of the withheld information had been withheld under regulation 13 of the EIR (the personal data exception). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(f) and regulation 13 of the EIR to withhold the withheld information. The Commissioner is also satisfied that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council has provided the appropriate information to the complainant and no further information within the scope of the request is held. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 12(5)(f); EIR 13
View Cornwall Council
13 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (“the Council”) in relation to a job role they applied for in 2021. The Council explained that the requested information is not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision notice. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2023/0190 struck out.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1)
View Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea
13 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Police Service of Northern Ireland is entitled to refuse the request under section 31(1)(a) of FOIA (law enforcement). No steps required. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0204 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(1)(a); FOI 40(2)
View Police Service of Northern Ireland
13 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that Ulster University (‘the University’) correctly refused the request for information about the University’s acquisition of student rooms and property under section 43(2) of FOIA, which concerns commercial interests. The University breached section 17 as it did not issue its refusal within the required timescale and the refusal did not include any public interest reasoning. It is not necessary for the University to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 43
View Ulster University
13 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, Ulster University (‘the University’) does not hold the information requested in parts 1, 4 and 5 of the 16-part request for information about different aspects of the running of the University. The University’s response to those parts therefore complied with section 1(1) of FOIA but it breached section 10(1) which concerns the timeliness of the response.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Ulster University
13 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs) conducted in relation to the Integrated Risk and Intelligence Service (IRIS). The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) disclosed redacted versions of the DPIAs citing section 31(1)(a) for the exempt information. The Commissioner’s decision is that DWP has correctly engaged section 31(1)(a) and the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner finds that DWP breached section 10(1) by disclosing the redacted DPIAs outside of the statutory time frame. The Commissioner does not require further steps. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0211 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 31
View Department for Work and Pensions
13 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested any details and correspondence held between the Science Museum Group (SMG) and the Cabinet Office relating to the Adani Group or its subsidiaries over a certain timeframe. The same information was also requested between the SMG and the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS). The SMG provided the information it held in a redacted form, withholding some of the information under sections 36, 43(2), 40(2), and section 21 of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that SMG has appropriately cited section 36(2)(c) of FOIA and that the public interest favours non-disclosure. SMG also cited section 43(2) of FOIA correctly and the public interest lies in maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner has also concluded, on the balance of probability, that no further information falling within scope is held by the SMG. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 36; FOI 43(2)
View Science Museum Group
13 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, Ulster University (‘the University’) does not hold the information requested about marketing budgets and complied with section 1(1) of FOIA. The University breached section 10(1), however, which concerns the timeliness of the response.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Ulster University
13 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (“the public authority”) about the expenses payments made to a particular contracted individual. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is not entitled to rely on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold that part of the requested information that this decision notice relates to. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps: Disclose the withheld information, about expenses under £500, to the complainant. 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.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Sandwell Council
13 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that Ulster University (‘the University’) correctly applied section 21(1) and 43(2) of FOIA to information the complainant has requested in three parts of their request for information about students. The exemptions concern information that is already accessible and commercial interests, respectively. He also finds that, on the balance of probabilities, the University does not hold the information requested in the final part of the request and complied with section 1(1). The University breached section 10(1) and 17(1) of FOIA, however, which concern the timeliness of the response and refusal. Information Tribunal EA/2023/0199 FTT appeal allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 17; FOI 21; FOI 43
View Ulster University
13 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested correspondence relating to a swimming club. The above public authority disclosed some information and eventually relied on sections 36 (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs), 41 (breach of confidence) and 40(2) of FOIA (third party personal data) to withhold the remainder. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has correctly relied upon sections 40(2) and 41 of FOIA to withhold information. Section 36 of FOIA is engaged in respect of some of the withheld information and, where it is, the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The public authority breached section 10 of FOIA as it failed to disclose non-exempt information within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.Keywords: safeguarding, internal decision-making
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 36; FOI 40; FOI 41
View Sport England
13 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a request for information relating to private ambulance transfers used by the Trust. The Trust provided a copy of a response it had given in reply to a separate FOI request it had received relating to private transfers. The complainant asked for an internal review as the Trust had not provided any of the information they had requested. The Trust confirmed that it did not hold the requested information under section 1(1)(a) FOIA. The Commissioner considers, on the balance of probabilities the Trust was correct to confirm it does not hold the requested information under section 1(1)(a) FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View West Midlands Ambulance Service University NHS Foundation Trust
13 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about damages and costs paid as a result of assaults on female prisoners. The Ministry of Justice (the ‘MOJ’) initially confirmed that a low number of assaults had occurred during the time period specified by the request, but refused to provide the requested information by virtue of section 40(2) (personal information) of FOIA. Ultimately, the MOJ refused to confirm or deny whether it held the requested information, citing section 40(5B)(a)(i) of FOIA (the ‘neither confirm or deny’ provision for personal information). The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOJ has properly relied on section 40(5B)(a)(i) of FOIA to refuse to confirm or deny whether any information associated with the specified assaults is held. No steps are required as a result of this notice. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0148 appeal allowed in part.Keywords: Transgender, sexual assault
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Ministry of Justice
13 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from HM Treasury about correspondence and documents from particular meetings with Jesse Norman concerning the Loan Charge.
The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, HM Treasury does not hold any further information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner also finds that HM Treasury is entitled to rely on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold some of the requested information.
The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0201 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 40(2)
View HM Treasury
13 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested minutes of particular Committee meetings. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Financial Ombudsman Service breached sections 10(1) and 17(1) of FOIA as it did not communicate all the non-exempt information or issue a refusal notice within 20-working days of the request. It is not necessary for the Financial Ombudsman Service to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 17
13 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs) conducted in relation to the Integrated Risk and Intelligence Service (IRIS) since 2019. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) disclosed redacted versions of the DPIAs citing section 31(1)(a) for the exempt information. The Commissioner’s decision is that DWP has correctly engaged section 31(1)(a) and balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(1)(a)
View Department for Work and Pensions
13 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Breckland District Council (“the Council”) about grounds maintenance contracts for the Thetford area, specifically a copy of the relevant contract(s). The Council disclosed part of the relevant contract but withheld further information within the contract and the related GIS shapefiles under the confidentiality of commercial information exception under regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR to refuse to provide the withheld information. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2023/0198 appeal withdrawn.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e)
View Breckland Council
13 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office in relation to letters being sent to individuals who are being relocated to Rwanda. The Home Office has cited section 22 of FOIA – information intended for future publication. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has correctly engaged section 22 of FOIA and that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. However, as the Home Office failed to provide a response to the request within 20 working days, it has breached section 10(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the Home Office to take any steps as a result of this Decision Notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 22
View Home Office
13 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Department for Transport (“DfT”) in relation to all communication between the DfT and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency between 1 June 2015 and 31 October 2015. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the DfT does not hold the requested information. However, the DfT has breached section 10(1) of FOIA as it failed to respond to the request within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require the DfT to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1); FOI 10(1)
View Department for Transport
13 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to Loan Charge from His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (“HMRC”). HMRC provided some of the information and withheld the remainder under section 31(1)(d) of FOIA (prejudice to the assessment or collection of tax) and section 42 of FOIA (legal professional privilege).The Commissioner’s decision is that HMRC was entitled to rely on section 31(1)(d) and section 42 of FOIA to refuse the request. No steps required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31; FOI 42
13 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about street lighting. 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 in recorded form and has therefore complied with its duty under Regulation 5(1) of the EIR. The public authority breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR as it provided some information outside of the 20 working day window. The Commissioner does not require further steps.Keywords: minutes
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2)
13 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to Councillors who are in council tax arrears. Derby City Council (the Council) have refused the request under section 40(2)(a) - third party personal data, of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that the exception at section 40(2)(a) is not engaged. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation - Disclose the withheld information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Derby City Council
13 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from Charnwood Borough Council (“the Council”) in relation to documents and correspondence held for a specific area of land since 1 January 2020. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to refuse to comply with the request in accordance with regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR. The Commissioner has also decided that the Council complied with its obligations under regulation 9 of the EIR, by providing adequate advice and assistance to the complainant. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b); EIR 9
View Charnwood Borough Council
10 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information associated with meetings held within a specific timeframe. Castle Point Borough Council (the “council”) refused to confirm or deny whether it held the requested information under section 40(5B)(a)(i) FOIA. The Commissioner considers that the council was correct to apply section 40(5B)(a)(i) FOIA to refuse to confirm or deny whether the requested information is held. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps. First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Information Rights appeal EA/2023/0183 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(5)(b)(a)(i)
View Castle Point Borough Council
10 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested the identity of the individual who provided specific photographs in respect of a particular planning application. Cheshire West and Chester Council (the Council) withheld the information requested under regulation 13 (personal data) of the EIR. The Commissioner has determined that the Council has correctly applied regulation 13 to the withheld information. He does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13
View Cheshire West and Chester Council
10 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to pay awards. HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) suggested that, based on one interpretation of the request, the information would be subject to the exemption for prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs (section 36. HMRC also confirmed that clarification should have been sought from the complainant but did not explicitly ask the complainant to provide this clarification. The Commissioner’s decision is that HMRC has breached section 16(1) of the FOIA as the request did not have a single objective reading, but that HMRC did not seek clarification of the request under section 1(3) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires HMRC provide the complainant with advice and assistance by requesting clarification of the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 16(1)
10 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 Metropolitan Police Service
10 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from Norfolk County Council (“the Council”) in relation to Norwich Western Link Road. The Council refused the request on the basis of regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR – manifestly unreasonable. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) to refuse the request. The Commissioner is satisfied that there has been no breach of regulation 9 of the EIR, as the Council offered sufficient advice and assistance to the complainant. However, as the Council failed to respond to the requests within 20 working days, it has breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b); EIR 5; EIR 9
View Norfolk County Council
10 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority is entitled to rely on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold all of the information requested in questions 1 and 3. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.Keywords: small numbers, Motivated Intruder Test, Balancing Test
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council
10 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Shropshire Council (“the Council”) relating to the sale of a farm by the Council in 2004. The Council advised the requestor that it does not hold information within scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council was correct to confirm that it does not hold the requested information. However, the Council did breach section 10 by not responding to the requests within 20 working days. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Shropshire Council
10 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information about the liveable streets programme. London Borough of Tower Hamlets (the Council) provided some information and stated other information was exempt under regulation 12(4)(e) (internal communications) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied regulation 12(4)(e) to the remaining withheld information. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e)
View London Borough of Tower Hamlets
10 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) relating to Direct Temporary Recruits (DTRs) who joined the Child Maintenance Group in 2021 in a particular area. The DWP provided some information in response to the first part of the request but stated at internal review that no recorded information was held regarding the second part of the request. The complainant did not accept this position. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probability, the DWP does not hold any information falling within the second part of the request. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Department for Work and Pensions
10 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (“the public authority”). The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to refuse to comply with the request in accordance with section 12(1) (cost limit) of FOIA. The Commissioner also finds that the public authority complied with its obligations under section 16 of FOIA to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16
View Department for Culture, Media and Sport
9 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Charity Commission for Northern Ireland (the Charity Commission) relating to the names of all trustee board members for the Lower Shankill Community Association between 2018 and 2020. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Charity Commission is entitled to rely on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold some of the requested information, namely the names of former trustees. The Commissioner does not require the Charity Commission to take any steps. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0166 appeal allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Equality Commission for Northern Ireland
9 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested full copies of Dominic Cummings’ diary appointments from January through to March 2020. The Cabinet Office originally withheld some of the requested information under section 35(1)(a)(formulation or development of government policy) and withheld some other information held under section 40(2)(third party personal data). In their internal review, and in the alternative to section 35(1)(a), the Cabinet Office relied upon section 36 (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) to withhold the information in its entirety. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the Cabinet Office also applied section 35(1)(b)(Ministerial communications) and section 35(1)(d)(operation of any Ministerial private office) to some of the information held within scope of the request.The Commissioner’s decision is that the withheld information is not exempt under section 35(1)(a) but some of the information is exempt under sections 35(1)(b) and 35(1)(d). The
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View Cabinet Office
9 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about an “equalities club”. The above public authority relied on sections 22 (intended for publication) and 40(2) of FOIA (third party personal data) to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has appropriately relied on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold the information falling within the scope of element [1] of the request. In respect of elements [2] and [3], the emails can be sufficiently anonymised to the point that they are no longer personal data and therefore s40(2) does not apply. Section 22 does not apply to any of the withheld information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the information falling within the scope of elements [2], [3] and [4]. The public authority must make the redactions described in the confidential annex to remove identifiable information.Keywords: attendance
Exemptions cited: FOI 22; FOI 40(2)
9 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested various information in respect of road inspections and repairs regarding a particular road. Cheshire East Council (‘the Council’) refused the request, citing regulation 12(5)(b) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (‘the EIR’). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to refuse the request on the basis that regulation 12(5)(b) applies to the information.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View Cheshire East Council
9 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Barnet (the “Council”) relating to legal advice sought from counsel by the Council in relation to the lawfulness of its practices in relation to the Care Act. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on section 42(1) (legal professional privilege) of the FOIA to withhold the requested information. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2023/0192 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 42(1)
View Barnet Council
9 Mar 2023Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested from Cornwall Council, (‘the council’), copies of contracts between the council and Citybus. He also requested copies of contracts with all of the relevant companies regarding a bus fares pilot. The council applied Regulation 12(5)(e) to withhold the information from disclosure. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was not correct to apply the exception in Regulation 12(5)(e) to withhold some of the information requested. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. To disclose a copy of the contracts to the complainant, subject to schedule 17 of each contract being redacted, the information highlighted in paragraph 29, and any personal data falling within the scope of Regulation 13 of the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e)
View Cornwall Council
9 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the use of strip searches in custody from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”). The MPS refused to provide the requested information citing section 22 (Information intended for future publication) of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that the MPS was entitled to rely on section 22 FOIA. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 22
View Metropolitan Police Service
9 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to a talk given to councillors and staff and an e-learning training module. The Commissioner’s decision is that Swansea Council (“the Council”) is not entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(e) to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the Toolbox talk material; Provide advice and assistance to the complainant to determine what, if any, could be provided within scope of the request relating to the e-learning module. The Council 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: EIR 12(4)(e)
View Swansea Council
9 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to any documentation sent between the Crown Prosecution Service (“CPS”) and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (“FCDO”) in respect of assurances given by the United States regarding the conditions of incarceration of persons extradited from the United Kingdom to the United States.The Commissioner’s decision is that the CPS was entitled to apply section 12(2) of FOIA, and he is satisfied that the CPS met its obligations under section 16(1) to offer advice and assistance. No steps are required. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2023/0236 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(2); FOI 16
View Crown Prosecution Service
9 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Greater Manchester Police (the public authority). The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to refuse to comply with the request in accordance with section 12(1) (cost limit) of FOIA. The Commissioner also finds that the public authority complied with its obligations under section 16 of FOIA to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16
View Greater Manchester Police
9 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Longstanton Parish Council (the public authority). The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to refuse to comply with the request in accordance with section 12(1) (cost limit) of FOIA. The Commissioner also finds that the public authority complied with its obligations under section 16 of FOIA to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16
8 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The Commissioner’s decision is that National Highways is entitled to withhold the requested information associated with the M4 to Dorset Connectivity Strategic Study under regulation 12(4)(d) of the EIR as it relates to material in the course of completion. It is not necessary for National Highways to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d)
View National Highways
8 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of direct correspondence and communication between Boris Johnson and Evgeny Lebedev, during the period between 1 May 2020 and 1 August 2020.The Commissioner’s decision is that, on balance of probability, the public authority does not and did not, at the time of the request was made, hold official information within the scope of the request.
The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Cabinet Office
8 Mar 2023Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to any concerns expressed to the Crown Prosecution Service (“CPS”) in respect of conditions of incarceration of persons extradited from the United Kingdom to the United States.The Commissioner’s decision is that the CPS was entitled to apply section 12(2) of FOIA, and he is satisfied that the CPS met its obligations under section 16(1) to offer advice and assistance. No steps are required. First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Information Rights appeal EA/2023/0294 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16
View Crown Prosecution Service
8 Mar 2023Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Business Services Organisation (“BSO”) relating to data sharing agreements and Data Protection Impact Assessments (“DPIAs”). BSO eventually provided all of the requested information, however this was not provided in a timely manner within the statutory requirements of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that BSO did not comply with sections 1(1) and 10(1) of FOIA.As BSO has now disclosed all the outstanding information in response to the complainant’s request, the Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10