14 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from Leeds City Council (“the Council”) which concerns an application for a Certificate of Lawful Existing Use or Development on private, protected green belt land. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has not correctly applied Regulation 13 of the EIR to all of the requested information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the last two paragraphs of the email dated 23 September 2020, ensuring that any personal data is redacted under the terms of the Data Protection Act 2018. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2021/0289 appeal part-allowed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13(1)
View Leeds City Council
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 upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Newcastle City Council (“the Council”), copies of specified communications between the Council and Adderstone Group and it’s representatives. 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 Newcastle City Council
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
13 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) information relating to correspondence between Matt Hancock, Lord Bethell and Jonathan Marron regarding Hinpack Limited. By the date of this notice, the DHSC had not provided a substantive response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DHSC has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.The Commissioner requires the DHSC 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 DHSC 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 Department of Health and Social Care
13 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested schedules of DCP (damage to crown property, now known as damage to the Strategic Network) rates from Highways England (HE), matters relating to them, and a county court case. HE refused to provide the information citing section 14(1) – vexatious request. The Commissioner’s decision is that HE has cited section 14(1) appropriately. The Commissioner does not require HE to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0256 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View National Highways
13 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested emails from Sheffield City Council (the “Council”) relating to the ‘NUM building’. The Council had failed to provide a substantive response by the date of this notice.The Commissioner’s decision is that 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 issue a substantive response, under the FOIA, to the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Sheffield City Council
13 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the information contained in a particular named file which has been retained by the Cabinet Office although it has been identified on the website of The National Archives. The Cabinet Office refused to provide it citing section 24(1) (national security). It upheld this position at internal review. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office is entitled to rely on section 24(1) as its basis for refusing to provide the requested information. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 24
View Cabinet Office
13 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about expenses claimed by Royal Borough of Greenwich’s head of its Legal Department. The Royal Borough of Greenwich relied on section 14 (vexatious request) not to provide information to the complainant. The Commissioner’s decision is that Royal Borough of Greenwich has not persuaded her that it correctly relied on section 14 to withhold requested information from the complainant. The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide a fresh response to the complainant which does not rely on section 14 to ensure compliance with the legislation. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0292 allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Royal Borough of Greenwich
10 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a copy of a response to the 2020 University Superannuation Scheme (USS) Consultation. The Governing Body of the University of Sussex refused to provide the information and relied on section 36 of the FOIA (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) in order to do so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the University is entitled to rely on section 36(2)(b)(ii) of the FOIA to withhold the requested information and that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View University of Sussex
10 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the employment and career pay advancement of black staff at the Diocese of Westminster Academy Trust (the Trust). The Trust relied on section 12(1) of the FOIA to refuse the request, on the basis that the cost of providing the requested information would exceed the appropriate limit set out in the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust is entitled to rely on section 12(1) of the FOIA to refuse the complainant’s request. The Commissioner does not consider that it would be possible to refine the request meaningfully in order to bring the cost of compliance within the cost limit and is therefore satisfied that the Trust has not breached section 16(1) (duty to provide advice and assistance). However, she has recorded procedural breaches of section 1(1), section 10(1), and section 17(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the Trust to take any steps as a result of this decision notice. First-tier tribunal (General
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 12; FOI 16; FOI 17
View THE DIOCESE OF WESTMINSTER ACADEMY TRUST
10 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Highways England about a claim. Highways England relied on section 17(6) of the FOIA not to provide the complainant with a section 14(1) refusal notice. This is because it had previously refused requests for information on similar matters under section 14(1) as it considered those requests to be vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: The request is vexatious and, under section 17(6) of the FOIA it would be unreasonable to expect HE to issue a further refusal notice in relation to this request. The Commissioner does not require Highways England to take any further action. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0259 appeal withdrawn.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17
View National Highways
10 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding seat forecasts made prior to the results being declared for historical General Elections. The BBC explained the information was covered by the derogation and excluded from FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that this information was held by the BBC for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and so was not covered by the FOIA. She therefore upholds the BBC’s position and requires no remedial steps to be taken in this case. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0264 appeal struck out.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View BBC
10 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested details of scans for fungal and pleural lung infections undertaken by University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust (“the Trust”) over a specified time period. The Trust refused to comply with the request under section 12 of the FOIA (cost of compliance). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust was entitled to apply section 12, and that it has complied with the requirement of section 16. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2021/0271 appeal struck out. Information Tribunal UT UA-2023-001938-GIA & UA-2023-001943-GIA PTA refused.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust
9 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the prescribing of Co-proxamol and the handling of FOIA requests. NHS Blackpool Clinical Commissioning Group (‘the CCG’) addressed the complainant’s questions but the complainant considers that the CCG holds relevant, recorded information with regard to four parts of his request. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: On the balance of probabilities, the CCG holds no recorded information within scope of parts 2 and 3 of the complainant’s request and has complied with section 1(1)(a) of the FOIA. Parts 7 and 8 of the request are not valid requests for information under section 8(1) of the FOIA and the CCG is not obliged to respond to those parts. The Commissioner does not require the CCG to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 8
View Blackpool Clinical Commissioning Group
9 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information associated with the governance of the Malvern Hills Conservators. The Charity Commission withheld the relevant information it holds under section 31(1)(g) of the FOIA (law enforcement), section 40(2) (personal data) and section 42 (legal professional privilege), with the public interest favouring maintaining the exemptions where relevant. The Charity Commission subsequently advised the Commissioner that it is no longer relying on the section 42 exemption. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: The Charity Commission is entitled to withhold the requested information under section 31(1)(g) of the FOIA, by reference to section 31(2)(f) and (g), and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require the Charity Commission to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View The Charity Commission
9 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made seven requests for information relating to fire at a property in Bridgend. The Commissioner’s decision is that Bridgend City Borough Council (BCBC ) was correct to aggregate the requests and that it was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require BCBC to take any steps as a result of this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1)
View Bridgend County Borough Council
9 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to planning permission granted by Tandridge District Council (the Council).The Council ultimately provided the complainant with information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, in failing to communicate that information within the statutory time for compliance the Council breached section 10(1) (time for compliance) of the FOIA. The Commissioner is satisfied that the Council holds no further information relating to this request and therefore requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10(1)
View Tandridge District Council
9 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested evidence, provided by the Department of Health Northern Ireland (DoH), about the wearing of face coverings on public transport. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DoH failed to issue a response to the request that complies with the requirements of section 1(1) of FOIA. In addition, the DoH breached section 10(1) of FOIA by failing to respond to the request within the required timeframe. The Commissioner requires the DoH to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a fresh response in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Department of Health NI
9 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant wrote to the public authority seeking details of remedies, compensation or any other types of payment made to tenants over a five year period in relation to repairs or improvements to the condition of their properties. The public authority refused to comply with the request on the basis of section 12(1) FOIA (compliance would exceed the appropriate limit). The Commissioner concluded that the public authority was entitled to rely on section 12(1) FOIA. The Commissioner however found the public authority in breach of section 16(1) FOIA and ordered it to take steps to ensure compliance with the Act.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16
View Waltham Forest Council
9 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about an investigation that may have occurred as a result of a whistleblowing concern. West London NHS Trust (‘the Trust’) would neither confirm nor deny whether it held the requested information, citing section 30(3) and 30(2)(b) (investigations and proceedings) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that West London NHS Trust is entitled to rely upon section 30(3) as a basis for neither confirming nor denying that it holds the requested information. The Commissioner requires the Trust to take no steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0251 under appeal. Information Tribunal UT UA-2023-001036-GIA PTA refused.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30
View West London NHS Trust
8 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) relating to the business case for Coventry’s all-electric city bus plan. By the date of this notice, WMCA had not provided a substantive response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that WMCA has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.The Commissioner requires WMCA 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. WMCA 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 West Midlands Combined Authority
8 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the ‘Covid vaccine for under 18s is welcome news’ face covering messaging. By the date of this notice the Department of Health of Northern Ireland (“the DoH”) had not issued a substantive response to this request.The Commissioner’s decision is that the DoH 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 DoH to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• The DoH must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.The DoH 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 Department of Health NI
8 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to a review of the Charity Commission for Northern Ireland. The Executive Office has only provided a partial response to the request; therefore the Commissioner’s decision is that the Executive Office has failed to comply with section 10(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to respond to the outstanding parts of the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
8 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust (the Trust) the total cost of legal services for the inquest of a named individual. The Trust cited section 12(1) of the FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust was not entitled to rely on section 12(1) of the FOIA to refuse to comply with the request. The Commissioner requires the Trust to issue a fresh response to the request which does not rely on section 12 of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View Avon and Wiltshire NHS Trust
8 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested quarterly offender management statistics. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) refused to provide the requested statistics, citing sections 21 (information accessible to applicant by other means) and 14 (vexatious request) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MoJ has not demonstrated that the request was vexatious and was therefore not entitled to rely on section 14(1) to refuse it. Nor has the MoJ demonstrated that the information was reasonably accessible to the applicant and was therefore not entitled to rely on section 21(1) to refuse it. The Commissioner requires the MoJ to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide the requested statistics.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14; FOI 21
View Ministry of Justice
8 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information comprising a report, complaints procedure and quarterly management statistics. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) denied holding the requested information relating to the complaints procedure, but provided a copy of the report. It refused to provide the requested statistics, citing sections 21 (information accessible to applicant by other means) and 14 (vexatious request) of FOIA. The Commissioner investigated the MoJ’s application of sections 14 and 21 to the requested statistics. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MoJ has not demonstrated that the request was vexatious and was therefore not entitled to rely on section 14(1) to refuse it. Nor has the MoJ demonstrated that the information was reasonably accessible to the applicant and was therefore not entitled to rely on section 21(1) to refuse it. The Commissioner requires the MoJ to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide the information within the scope of par
Exemptions cited: FOI 14; FOI 21
View Ministry of Justice
8 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the re-opening of the campus during the covid-19 pandemic. The Commissioner’s decision is that the University of Sheffield (‘the university’) failed to respond to the request for information within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 (time for compliance with the request) of the FOIA. The Commissioner is satisfied that the university has now provided a response to the request. Therefore the Commissioner does not require the university to take any further steps in relation to this request for information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View The University of Sheffield
8 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to a planning application submitted to Westminster City Council. The Council stated that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council does not hold the requested information, nor is it held on the Council’s behalf by another person. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0286 appeal struck out.
Exemptions cited: EIR 3
View Westminster Council
8 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to editorial guidelines, copies of complaints, and the recruitment to a post that was then occupied by Professor Richard Sambrook. The BBC explained that the first two parts of the request were covered by the derogation from the FOIA. The BBC also stated that the third part of the request was exempt under section 40(2) of the FOIA but later, at review, said that the information was not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the information at part one and two of the request is held by the BBC for the purposes of ‘journalism, art or literature’ and does not fall inside the FOIA. She therefore upholds the BBC’s position and requires no remedial steps to be taken. She also accepts, on the balance of probability, that the BBC does not hold any information relating to part three of the request. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0290 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View BBC
7 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) to disclose information relating to Eshott Flying School Ltd. The CAA refused to comply with the requests citing section 14(1) of the FOIA (vexatious requests). The Commissioner’s decision is the CAA is entitled to refuse to comply with the requests in accordance with section 14(1) of the FOIA. She does not require any further action to be taken. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2021/0284 Appeal Dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View Civil Aviation Authority
7 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the supply of canine cadavers to Bristol University (‘the university’). The university withheld the names and contact information of its canine cadaver suppliers under section 38(1)(b) (Health and Safety) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the university is entitled to rely upon 38(1)(b) as a basis for refusing to disclose the requested information. The Commissioner requires no further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 38
View The University of Bristol
7 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested data on the number of pupils not engaging with remote lessons at school. The Department for Education initially relied on section 22 of the FOIA (intended for future publication) to withhold the information, but then reversed itself and said that it held no relevant information. The Commissioner is satisfied that, on the balance of probabilities, the DfE does not hold the requested information and has therefore complied with its duty under section 1(1) of the FOIA. However, in failing to inform the complainant, within 20 working days, that it did not hold the requested information, the DfE breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Department for Education
7 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a copy of legal advice sought in relation to disciplinary regulations. The Council of the University of Birmingham relied on section 40(1) of the FOIA (personal data of the requestor) to withhold the information, before later arguing that it was also exempt under section 42 of the FOIA (Legal Professional Privilege). The Commissioner’s decision is that the University was only entitled to rely on section 40(1) of the FOIA to withhold some of the requested information. However, the remaining information engages section 42 and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. As the University failed to respond to elements of the request, that were not seeking personal data, under FOIA within 20 working days, it therefore breached section 17 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2021/0288 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 40(1); FOI 42
View The University of Birmingham
7 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information associated with the awarding of a contract. Department for Education (DfE) has released some information and advised it holds no further relevant information. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: On the balance of probabilities, DfE holds no further information within scope of the complainant’s request and has complied with section 1(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require DfE to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Department for Education
7 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a request for information relating to damage to Crown property. Highways England has refused to comply with the request under section 14(1) FOIA as it considers the request to be vexatious. The Commissioner considers that Highways England correctly applied section 14(1) FOIA and was not obliged to issue a refusal notice under section 17(6) FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View National Highways
7 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about an incident in Portrush during the “Open Week” in 2019. The Council disclosed some information but withheld the names of various individuals in reliance on the exemption at section 40(2) of FOIA (third party personal data). The complainant disputed the Council’s reliance on section 40(2) and asked the Commissioner to investigate whether further relevant information was held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on section 40(2) in respect of the withheld information. The Commissioner further finds that the Council does not hold any further information relevant to the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
7 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested data regarding cancer treatments. University Hospital Plymouth NHS Foundation Trust initially withheld some information, relying on section 41 (breach of confidence) and section 40(2) of the FOIA (personal data) to do so, before later disclosing it. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust has disclosed the information it holds and has therefore complied with its duty under section 1(1) of the FOIA. However, as it failed to provide some of the information within 20 working days, the Trust breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further steps. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2021/0247 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust
7 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from South Somerset District Council (“the Council”) relating to email correspondence between the chief executive and the Freedom of Information team.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. As a response has been issued, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View South Kesteven District Council
7 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information for all information held relating to a decision making process to have one provider (rather than more than one) to deliver a particular contract and all information held relating to a decision making process to use a restricted list- based procurement process with regard to a particular contract. The CCG has confirmed that no further information is held falling within the scope of the request other than that which has now been provided or withheld under section 40(2) FOIA. The Commissioner considers that on the balance of probabilities, there is no further recorded information held by the CCG under section 1(1)(a) FOIA falling within the scope of the request other than that which has already been provided or withheld under section 40(2) FOIA. The Commissioner also considers that the CCG was correct to redact the names from the information provided under section 40(2) FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 40(2)
View NHS North Central London ICB
7 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to a specific planning application. Bournemouth Christchurch & Poole Council disclosed some information and confirmed that other information was not held.The Commissioner’s decision is that Bournemouth Christchurch & Poole Council disclosed all the relevant information it held in accordance with regulation 5(1), that in confirming further information was not held, it correctly applied regulation 12(4)(a), and that in issuing a late internal review, it breached regulation 11(4). The Commissioner does not require Bournemouth Christchurch & Poole Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 5(1)
View BCP Council
6 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Rotherham Metropolitan Council information regarding statements made to the press. The council denied that the information was held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, Rotherham Metropolitan Council did not hold any information at the time of the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0275 struck out.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council
6 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request seeking multiple items of internal discussions regarding the regulatory treatment of risks in relation to the investment in certain assets by insurance firms. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to rely on the exemptions at section 36(2)(b) as the basis for withholding the disputed information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36(2)(b)
View Bank of England
6 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant wrote to the public authority seeking information relating to the Government’s response to a letter from the Chairman of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry to the previous Prime Minister with his recommended terms of reference for the Inquiry. The Commissioner concluded that the public authority was entitled to withhold the information held within the scope of the request on the basis of the exemptions at section 36(2)(b).
Exemptions cited: FOI 36(2)(b)
View Cabinet Office
3 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to commissioning polls by the BBC and polling companies used. The BBC responded that the requested information was covered by the derogation and hence excluded from the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that most of the information was held by the BBC for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and so was not covered by the FOIA. Following the Commissioner’s investigation, the BBC disclosed information requested in part 3 of the request. She upholds the BBC’s position on the rest of the request and requires no remedial steps to be taken in this case.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 3
View BBC
3 Sep 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) concerning a memorandum of understanding between the FOS and the Information Commissioner’s Office which has now been withdrawn. The FOS refused the request, considering it to be a vexatious request under section 14(1). The Commissioner’s decision is that the FOS has appropriately cited section 14(1) and that the FOS did not breach section 10(1) of the FOIA, responding within the statutory timeframe. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 14(1)
3 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from the Kirby Muxloe Parish Council (the “Council”) a copy of their Press and Media policy.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to respond to the requests within 20 working days and therefore breached Section 10 of the Freedom of Information Act (“the FOIA”).As a response has been issued, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1)
3 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the student record of current Taiwanese President, Tsai ing-wen. The Board of Trustees of the University of London (“the University”), withheld some information, relying on section 40(2) of the FOIA (third party personal data) to do so. It denied holding the remaining information. The Commissioner’s decision is that University has correctly relied upon section 40(2) in respect of some of the information it is withholding, but not all. She also considers that the University holds no further information within the scope of the request. In failing to inform the complainant of the information it did and did not hold at the time of the request, the University breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the University to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose, to the complainant, copies of the withheld information that it described to the Commissioner as categories A and B. Except that: The
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 40
View London
2 Sep 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested City, University of London (City) to disclose details of any and all awards made by City in any higher education framework other than FHEQ (Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications). City answered some of the questions but for the remainder advised the complainant that it does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities City does not hold the requested information. She has however found City in breach of section 10 of the FOIA, as it failed to provide a response to all elements of the request within 20 working days of receipt. The Commissioner does not require any further action to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View City of London
2 Sep 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the scoring and assessment notes from his company’s bid for a tender. Black Country and West Birmingham Clinical Commissioning Group withheld the requested information and relied on section 43(2) of the FOIA to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the CCG has failed to demonstrate why the exemption is engaged in the circumstances of this case and is therefore not entitled to rely on the exemption. The Commissioner requires the CCG to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose, to the complainant, a copy of the withheld information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43