24 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Croydon about traffic measures. The London Borough of Croydon has failed to respond to this request. The Commissioner requires the London Borough of Croydon to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The London Borough of Croydon must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View London Borough of Croydon
23 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from North East Lincolnshire Council (“the Council”) about warnings sent to food establishments. In a previous response, the Council disclosed some information to the requester, and refused the remainder of the request under section 12(1) of the FOIA – cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit. The Council was subsequently ordered by the Commissioner to issue a fresh response. In its fresh response, it refused to provide the outstanding information, stating it was exempt under section 30(1)(b) of the FOIA: investigations and proceedings. The Commissioner’s decision is that, while the information falls within the exemption at section 30(1)(b) of the FOIA, the balance of the public interests favours disclosure. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: subject to the redaction of third party personal data, as described in this notice, disclose the information to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30
View North East Lincolnshire Council
23 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information with regards to organ donation. The NHS Blood and Transplant (the NHSBT) provided information it held in its initial response to the complainant and further information during the Commissioner’s investigation. The complainant considers that more information is held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the NHSBT has now provided all the information it holds within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require the NHSBT to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
23 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
1. The complainant submitted a request to the London Borough of Brent (the Council) seeking planning information about a particular housing development. The Council provided him with information falling within the scope of his request and directed him to a website where further information could be found. The complainant argued that the link provided did not work and furthermore that the Council had not provided him with all of the information falling with the scope of his request. The Council subsequently provided the complainant with copies of the information which could be found at the website link but maintained its position that it did not hold any further information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner is satisfied that on the balance of probabilities the Council does not hold any further information falling within the scope of the request beyond that provided to the complainant. However, she has concluded that the Council breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2)
View London Borough of Brent
23 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (“DCMS”) for a copy of the Secretary of State's diary and related information. By the date of this notice, the DCMS had not issued a substantive response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DCMS has failed complete its deliberations on the balance of the public interest within a reasonable time and has therefore breached section 17(3) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires DCMS to either disclose the requested information or, issue a refusal notice in accordance with the requirements of section 17 of the FOIA. The DCMS must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17(3)
View Department for Culture, Media and Sport
22 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information on any correspondence and communication, from August 2008 to August 2009, between Kit Malthouse, then Deputy Mayor of London, and HRH The Prince of Wales on the subject of the planned redevelopment of Chelsea Barracks. The Commissioner’s decision is that the GLA has conducted reasonable searches for the requested information which would have located the information if it was held. She has therefore concluded that, on the balance of probabilities, the GLA does not hold any information in the scope of the request.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
View Greater London Authority
22 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”) information about a case in which a decision was made to take no further action. The MPS refused to disclose the requested information, citing section 30(1)(a)(i) (Investigations and proceedings) of the FOIA. During the Commissioner’s investigation, the MPS revised its position, adding reliance on sections 40(2) (Personal information), 38(1)(a) (Health and safety), 27(1)(a)(b) (International relations) and 42(1) (Legal professional privilege) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MPS was entitled to rely on section 30(1)(a)(i) of the FOIA to withhold the information. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30
View Metropolitan Police Service
22 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Runnymede Borough Council about the number of applicants for social housing properties. The Council disclosed some of the requested information but refused to provide the remainder under section 12 (exemption where cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to apply section 12, and that it has complied with the requirement of section 16. However, the Council breached section 17 by failing to issue a refusal notice under the correct legislation. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16; FOI 17
View Runnymede Borough Council
22 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the People’s History Museum. The Commissioner’s decision is that Manchester City Council (MCC) has correctly cited section 12(1) FOIA, in response to the request. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View Manchester City Council
21 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a list of fee-paying schools that had charitable status. The Charity Commission originally stated that it did not hold the requested information, but later relied on section 12 of the FOIA (cost exceeds appropriate limit) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Charity Commission is entitled to rely on section 12 of the FOIA to refuse the request. However, as the Charity Commissioner did not issue its refusal notice within 20 working days, it breached section 17 of the FOIA. As the Charity Commission also failed to inform the complainant, within 20 working days, that it held relevant information, it breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 12; FOI 17
View The Charity Commission
21 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Cheshire East Council (“the Council”) information regarding Covid-19 disbursements. The Council refused to disclose some of the information and cited section 31(1)(a) (prevention or detection of crime) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly applied the exemption to the withheld information. Therefore, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(1)(a)
View Cheshire East Council
21 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested data on completed appointments. Unsworth Group Practice relied on section 12(1) of the FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Practice was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of the FOIA to refuse the request. However, it failed to provide reasonable advice and assistance and therefore breached section 16 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
21 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
1. The complainant requested information from the Home Office (HO) about audio recordings from a staff briefing at Brook House Immigration Removal Centre. By the date of this notice the HO had not issued a substantive response to this request.2. The Commissioner’s decision is that the HO has failed to complete its deliberations on the balance of the public interest within a reasonable time and has therefore breached section 17(3) of the FOIA.3. The Commissioner requires the HO to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Having confirmed that information is held within the scope of the request: either disclose the requested information or issue a refusal notice in accordance with the requirements of section 17 of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17(3)
View Home Office
21 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
1. The complainant requested information from the Home Office about monthly use of force governance meetings held by Serco, and asked a number of questions regarding the meetings. 2. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA, in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days.3. The Commissioner requires the Home Office to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation.• the Home Office must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
21 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information regarding a particular road in respect of its status as either a private or public right of way. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough of Bromley (“the Council”) is not able to rely on regulation 12(5)(b) – The course of justice, to withhold the requested information because the exception is not engaged. The Commissioner finds the exception at regulation 12(4)(e) – Internal communications is engaged, however, the balance of the public interest favours disclosure. The Commissioner requires the public authority disclose the withheld information with the personal data of junior officers and named individuals redacted in accordance with regulation 13 – Personal data.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e); EIR 12(5)(b)
View Bromley Council
21 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the Buckinghamshire Grammar Schools (TBGS) the minutes of a meeting that took place on 27 September 2019. TBGS responded by stating that it did not hold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probability, TBGS does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
21 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the funding that Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) has received from the Home Office, for the provision of care to British children returning from Syria. The Trust has relied on section 24 of the FOIA (safeguarding national security) to withhold some of the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust has correctly engaged the provisions of the section 24 exemption, and that the public interest favours maintaining the exemption and withholding the requested information. However, the Commissioner has recorded a procedural breach of section 10 of the FOIA, as the Trust failed to respond to the complainant’s request within the statutory time limits. The Commissioner does not require the Trust to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 24
View Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust
20 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Department for Health and Social Care relating to emails between the UK Government and Mr Matt Hancock’s private email account(s). By the date of this notice the Department for Health and Social Care had failed to provide a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department for Health and Social Care has breached section 10(1) of the 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 Department for Health and Social Care to respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the FOIA. The Department for Health and Social Care must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Department of Health and Social Care
20 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Royal Berkshire NHS Trust (“the Trust”) about patients who presented at the emergency department and were not screened for Covid-19 at booking.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust breached section 10(1) of the FOIA by failing to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust
20 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Cabinet Office relating to a review of the refurbishment of the Prime Minister’s private accommodation at Downing Street.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.A response has subsequently been provided and no steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Cabinet Office
20 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Manchester City Council about appeals relating to Penalty Charge Notices. The original request (‘Request 1’), and the clarification to some parts of it (‘Request 2’) was considered by the Commissioner in decision notice FS50834972. In that decision notice the Commissioner ordered the Council to provide advice and assistance in respect of Request 1 [element 4], and to issue a substantive response to Request 2. The Council subsequently provided advice and assistance in response to Request 1 [element 4] – but confirmed that section 12 would otherwise apply to it, and issued a substantive response to Request 2. The complainant subsequently complained to the Commissioner about the Council’s position in respect of specific elements of Request 1 and Request 2. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: In respect of Request 1 [element 4] the Council is entitled to apply section 12. In respect of Request 1 [elements 3 and 5], that no recorded info
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 12
View Manchester City Council
20 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Telford and Wrekin Council (“the Council”) relating to the resurfacing of a specific car park. The Commissioner’s decision is that Council failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. As a response has subsequently been provided no steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Telford and Wrekin Council
17 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Maldon District Council (“the Council”) about communications between the Council and a development planning applicant or the applicant’s agents.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Maldon District Council
16 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested details of expenses relating to Operation Kenova. The Commissioner’s decision is that Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) has failed to respond to the request for information within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10(1) (time for compliance with the request) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires PSNI to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a response, in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA, to the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Police Service of Northern Ireland
16 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested any emails sent or received about the renaming of Howden Junior School’s school houses. Howden Junior School withheld the requested information under section 40(2) FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Howden Junior School (the ‘School’) has correctly withheld the requested information under section 40(2) FOIA. However, the School did not comply with Section 17(7) FOIA. The Commissioner requires no further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17(7); FOI 40(2)
View NORWOOD GREEN JUNIOR SCHOOL
16 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to a report issued in 2007. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) does not hold any information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this Decision Notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Department of Health and Social Care
16 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to complaints made about a specific councillor. The Commissioner’s decision is that Shropshire Council (the council) has not correctly applied section 40(2) FOIA. Any information the council may hold would be personal data and therefore the Commissioner is proactively applying section 40(5B) FOIA to prevent the council from confirming or denying if it holds the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Shropshire Council
16 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from NHS England information relating to NHS dental services. By the date of this notice NHS England had not provided a substantive response to this request.The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS England has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached regulation section 10 of the FOIA.The Commissioner requires NHS England to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.NHS England 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 10
View NHS England
16 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Southwark (“the Council”) relating to the installation of fire alarms at a specific property. By the date of this notice, the Council had not provided a substantive response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached regulations 5(2) of the EIR.The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the EIR. 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 the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Southwark Council
16 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Southwark (“the Council”) relating to social housing developments. By the date of this notice, the Council had not provided a substantive response to the request.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.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 the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Southwark Council
16 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested details of a contractor’s request to carry out soil translocation works. At various points, High Speed Two Limited relied on Regulations 12(4)(a) (information not held), 12(4)(d) (material in the course of completion), 12(4)(e) (internal communications), 13 (third party personal data), 12(5)(a) (public safety) and 12(5)(e) (commercial interests) of the EIR. By the completion of the investigation it had withdrawn its reliance on the latter two exceptions. The Commissioner’s decision is that only some of the withheld information engages Regulation 12(4)(e), although where it does, the public interest favours disclosure. She finds that Regulation 12(4)(d) is only engaged in relation to some of the requested information and, where it is, the public interest favours maintaining the exception. Finally, the Commissioner considers that Regulation 13 has been incorrectly applied in a single instance. As HS2 Ltd failed to complete its internal review (reconsideration) w
Exemptions cited: EIR 11; EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 12(4)(e); EIR 13; EIR 14
View High Speed Two (HS2) Limited
16 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a list of email addresses for the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman’s (‘the Ombudsman’) investigators. The Ombudsman has withheld this information citing section 40(2) (personal information), and by extension 40(3)(a), of the FOIA as its basis for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is the Ombudsman is entitled to rely upon section 40(2) as a basis for refusing to disclose the requested information. The Commissioner requires no further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman
16 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Southwark (“the Council”) relating to the allocation of social housing. By the date of this notice, the Council had not provided a substantive response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA. 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 the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Southwark Council
16 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested details of expenses relating to Operation Kenova. The Commissioner’s decision is that Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) has failed to respond to the request for information within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10(1) (time for compliance with the request) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires PSNI to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a response, in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA, to the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Police Service of Northern Ireland
15 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Southwark (“the Council”) relating to the installation of a fire alarm system at a specific property. By the date of this notice, the Council had not provided a substantive response to the request.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR.The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the EIR. 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 the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Southwark Council
15 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) relating to modifications taking place at a specific oil site. By the date of this notice, the HSE had not provided a substantive response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the HSE has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.The Commissioner requires the HSE to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA. The HSE 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 10
View Health and Safety Executive
15 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about previous pandemic preparedness exercises. Public Health England initially refused to provide any information and relied on section 24 of the FOIA (national security) in order to do so. By the point of this notice, PHE had disclosed the majority of the requested information but still wished to rely on section 24 to withhold the remainder. The Commissioner’s decision is that PHE has failed to demonstrate that section 24 is engaged and is thus not entitled to rely on that exemption. The Commissioner requires PHE to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose, to the complainant, a copy of the withheld information. PHE may only continue to withhold that which it has identified to the Commissioner as comprising personal data.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 24
View UK Health Security Agency
15 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant wrote to the public authority seeking information regarding an investigation by the public authority into the unauthorised disclosure of information in relation to telecoms firm Huawei and the UK’s 5G phone network following a National Security Council meeting. The public authority withheld the information held within the scope of the request (the disputed information) relying on the exemptions at sections 31(1)(g), 35(1)(b) and 41(1) FOIA. The Commissioner concluded that the public authority was entitled to withhold the disputed information on the basis of the exemptions at sections 31(1)(g) (by virtue of 31(2)(b)) and 35(1)(b) FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(1)(g); FOI 31(2)(b); FOI 35(1)(b)
View Cabinet Office
15 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested communications between the public authority and a named group of companies in relation to tax avoidance schemes. The public authority refused to confirm or deny whether it held the requested information on the basis of the exemption at section 44(2) FOIA (Prohibitions on disclosure).
The Commissioner has concluded that the public authority was entitled to rely on section 44(2) FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 44
15 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from NHS Improvement relating to the work undertaken to assess the impact of the CQC ‘Requires Improvement’ rating. By the date of this notice NHS Improvement had failed to provide a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS Improvement has breached section 10(1) of the 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 NHS Improvement to respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the FOIA. The Surgery must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View NHS England
15 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from West Midlands Police (WMP) information about its procedures for investigating complaints made against it. WMP initially refused the request, citing section 21 (information accessible to applicant by other means) of the FOIA. It disclosed weblinks to relevant information and also directed the complainant to its publication scheme. At internal review, the complainant clarified his request, and WMP disclosed more weblinks and externally produced guidance and procedures on the police complaints system. The complainant believed that more information was held. Specifically, he believed WMP held an internally produced complaints manual which it had not disclosed. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, WMP does not hold an internal complaints manual and that WMP’s handling of the request complied with the requirements of section 1(1) of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View West Midlands Police
15 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Winchester City Council (“the Council”) the names and addresses of persons to whom penalty charge notices (“PCNs”) had been issued in respect of loading bays in Acorn Close (for the year 2020) and in Fromund Road Spur (for the years 2015-2020). The Council withheld the requested information under section 40(2) FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is the Council correctly withheld the information under section 40(2) FOIA.The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Winchester City Council
15 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant wrote to the public authority seeking information regarding an investigation by the public authority into the unauthorised disclosure of information in relation to telecoms firm Huawei and the UK’s 5G phone network following a National Security Council meeting. The public authority withheld the information held within the scope of the request (the disputed information) relying on the exemptions at sections 31(1)(g), 24(1), 27(1) and 41(1) FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to withhold the disputed information on the basis of the exemptions at sections 31(1)(g) (by virtue of 31(2)(b)) FOIA. Information Tribunal appeal UA-2024-000885-GIA PTA refused.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(1)(g); FOI 31(2)(b)
View Cabinet Office
15 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Southwark (“the Council”) relating to a Modular Management Agreement and a Tenancy Management Organisation. The complainant also requested information relating to maintenance repairs at a specific property. By the date of this notice, the Council had not provided a substantive response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA. 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 the Act and may be dealt with as a cont
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Southwark Council
15 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about rates associated with a contract Highways England had with Balfour Beatty Mott Macdonald for Area 10 of the road network. Highways England has advised that it does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: On the balance of probabilities, Highways England does not hold the information the complainant has requested, and its response complied with section 1(1)(a) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require Highways England to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0297 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View National Highways
15 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the numbers of partially retired civil servants and prison officers who worked overtime during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Department of Finance refused the request stating that the information about civil servants was not held and that information about the prison officers was exempt under section 40(2) of FOIA due to the small number of individuals involved.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department did hold the requested information about the numbers of partially retired civil servants but did not hold information about the numbers of partially retired prison officers. Therefore, the Department failed to comply with sections 1, 10 and 17(1) of the FOIA. The Department also has not demonstrated that section 40(2) of the FOIA is engaged and is not entitled to rely on that exemption. The Commissioner does not require the Department to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 17
View Department of Finance
14 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested access to two closed files relating to a historic murder. The National Archives (‘TNA’) withheld the information citing section 38(1)(a) (health and safety) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the exemption is engaged and that the public interest lies in maintaining the exemption. Therefore TNA is entitled to rely upon section 38(1)(a) as a basis for refusing to disclose the requested information.
The Commissioner requires TNA to take no further steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2023/0126 struck out.
Exemptions cited: FOI 38
View The National Archives
14 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information as to whether specified offences were being investigated. The Crown Prosecution Service (the ‘CPS’) neither confirmed nor denied whether it held the requested information, citing the exemption at section 40(5) (personal information) of FOIA for the majority of the request; it responded to one part of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the CPS was entitled to neither confirm nor deny holding information by virtue of section 40(5B) of FOIA for part of the request. However, the Commissioner does not consider that the remaining part of the request constitutes information that is personal data, so she finds that section 40(5B) is not engaged. The Commissioner requires the CPS to disclose the information requested for parts 1 to 4 of the request in relation to paragraphs ‘B’ and ‘C’ of the request) within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Crown Prosecution Service
14 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information held by Brighton and Hove City Council relating to the responses of any requests made under the Freedom of Information Act or Environmental Information Regulations.The Commissioner’s decision is that Brighton and Hove City Council (“the Council”) failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Issue a substantive response, under the FOIA, to the request.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 the FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Brighton and Hove City Council
14 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Tower Hamlets (“the Council”) relating to emergency COVID-19 grants received by the Council. By the date of this notice, the Council had not provided a substantive response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIAThe Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA. 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 the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View London Borough of Tower Hamlets