12 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to an award made by The National Lottery Community Fund (TNLCF) to Mermaids UK. The Commissioner’s decision is that Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) has failed to issue a response to the request that complies with the requirements of section 1(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Trust to issue a fresh response to the request that does not rely on the assertion that the Trust does not hold information within scope of the request because it was not the originator of the information and would not therefore be held for its own purposes. In addition, the Trust has also breached section 10(1) of the FOIA by failing to respond to the request within the required timeframe.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust
9 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy about coal production. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy breached section 10(1) of the FOIA by failing to provide a response within 20 working days. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Department for Business and Trade
9 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (“DCMS”) relating to meetings with the Football Association or the National League. 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 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. 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
9 Jul 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about Prozac and brand name medication subscriptions. NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA) released some information and in the course of the Commissioner’s investigation released more information within scope of the request. The complainant considers further relevant information is held. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: On the balance of probabilities, NHSBSA has released to the complainant all the relevant information it holds and has complied with section 1(1) of the FOIA. NHSBSA breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it did not respond to the request or communicate the held information to the complainant within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require NHSBSA to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View NHS Business Services Authority
9 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (“DCMS”) any correspondence relating to the Dunelm House listing/Certificate of Immunity case from 2018 to the date of the request. The DCMS had failed to provide a substantive response by the date of this notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DCMS failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the DCMS to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a substantive response, in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA, to the request. The DCMS 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 for Culture, Media and Sport
9 Jul 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from British Wool copies of minutes from Board meetings. British Wool withheld the information under section 43(2) of the FOIA (commercial interests) and section 40(2) of the FOIA (personal data).
The Commissioner’s decision is that British Wool was entitled to withhold the information in relation to which it specified section 40(2) or 43(2). The Commissioner’s decision is also that British Wool was entitled to withhold under section 40(2) the names of individual employees and names of individuals from third party organisations.
However, British Wool did not cite an exemption for withholding some of the requested information. In relation to that information, the Commissioner requires British Wool to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
• Disclose to the complainant the information not highlighted within the copy of the withheld information it provided to the Commissioner, except from the names of individual employees,
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2); FOI 43(2)
View British Wool
9 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information held by Greater Manchester Police (GMP) regarding internal policies, memoranda, guidance and findings of internal investigations in relation to the storage and disposal of criminal cases.
The Commissioner’s decision is that GMP failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.
The Commissioner requires GMP to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
• Issue a substantive response, under the FOIA, to the request.
GMP 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 Greater Manchester Police
9 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy about coal excavation. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy breached section 10(1) of the FOIA by failing to provide a response within 20 working days. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Department for Business and Trade
9 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant wrote to Warwickshire County Council (the Council) to submit a multi-part request for information related to fire incidents. The Council disclosed the information requested apart from the information related to locations of fire, for which the Council cited section 40(2) of FOIA (personal data), as the basis for its refusal to comply with this part of the request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is not entitled to rely on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold the information requested.
The Commissioner requires the Council to disclose the remaining withheld data to ensure compliance with the legislation.
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 40(2)
View Warwickshire County Council
9 Jul 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding amending child maintenance payments without supporting evidence. The Commissioner’s decision is that DWP does not hold information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require DWP to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Department for Work and Pensions
9 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (“FCDO”) any information relating to the Home Secretary’s visit to police stations in Bahrain in December 2020. The FCDO had failed to provide a substantive response by the date of this notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FCDO failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the FCDO to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a substantive response, in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA, to the request. The FCDO 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 Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
8 Jul 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the number of cases in which the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) has issued a fine for failure to notify it of a change in circumstances. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) does not hold information falling within the scope of the request. However, she finds that DWP failed to provide adequate advice and assistance in accordance with its obligations under section 16. The Commissioner does not require DWP to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 16
View Department for Work and Pensions
8 Jul 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
In a multi-part request, the complainant has requested information associated with a penalty charge notice he received. Transport for London (TfL) addressed each of the complainant’s questions, withholding the information requested in three of them under section 40(2) of the FOIA as it considered this to be the personal data of third persons. The complainant disputes TfL’s reliance on section 40(2) to withhold some of the information he has requested. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: TfL is entitled to rely on section 40(2) of the FOIA to withhold the information the complainant has requested in parts 4, 8 and 9 of his request. This information can be categorised as the personal data of third persons and disclosing it would not be lawful. TfL’s response breached section 10(1) and section 17(1) of the FOIA as it did not comply with section 1(1) or provide the complainant with a refusal notice within 20 working days of the request. The Commissioner does not require TfL to take
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 17; FOI 40
View Transport for London
8 Jul 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to scientific evidence of Covid-19. The Commissioner’s decision is that Department of Health and Social Security (DHSC) has correctly cited section 12(1) FOIA in response to the request. The Commissioner does require the public authority to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View Department of Health and Social Care
8 Jul 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Stroud District Council about repairs and maintenance for the roofs of specified flats. Following the Commissioner’s investigation, Stroud District Council advised that it had disclosed all of the information relevant to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, no further requested information is held. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Stroud District Council
7 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the outcome of a statutory proposal relating to the Bellingham schools in June 2015. The council refused the request on the basis that the request was vexatious and applied section 14(1). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was not correct to apply section 14. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. To respond to the request again as required by FOIA without relying upon section 14.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Northumberland County Council
7 Jul 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about Surrey County Council’s (SCC) agreement with West Sussex Fire & Rescue Service (WSFRS) to provide its emergency call handling and mobilising function. SCC said that most of the requested information was exempt from disclosure under sections 41 (Information provided in confidence) and 43 (Commercial interests) of the FOIA. It also said that it did not hold some of the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, SCC did not hold some of the requested information. With regard to the information it did hold, she found that SCC was entitled to rely on section 43 of the FOIA to withhold it. The Commissioner also found that SCC breached sections 1 and 10 of the FOIA by failing to respond to the request within the statutory time for compliance. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0204 allowed in part.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 43
View Surrey County Council
7 Jul 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
Summary wording for website: The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Waltham Forest about a specified contract. She requested the information be supplied in hard copy format. The Commissioner finds that the London Borough of Waltham Forest discharged its duties in accordance with sections 10 and 11 of the FOIA. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 11
View Waltham Forest Council
7 Jul 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information held by Barham and Woolley Parish Council (the parish council) about a particular sub-committee meeting. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the parish council does not hold the information which the complainant has requested. However, as the parish council failed to provide its internal review response to the complainant within the prescribed forty day time period, the Commissioner has found a breach of regulation 11(4) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require the parish council to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 5(1)
7 Jul 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the closure of the UK’s borders in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Department for Transport (DfT) has refused to comply with the request as it says the cost of doing so would exceed the appropriate limit under section 12(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: DfT is entitled to rely on section 12(1) of the FOIA to refuse to comply with the complainant’s request as the cost of doing so would exceed the appropriate limit. DfT provided adequate advice and assistance and there was no breach of section 16(1) in DfT’s handling of the request. The Commissioner does not require DfT to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Department for Transport
7 Jul 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested from Department for Communities (“DfC”) information relating to the Casement Park Redevelopment. DfC refused the request under regulation 12(4)(d) (material in the course of completion, unfinished documents and incomplete data) of the EIR. However, during the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, DfC considered that much of the information could be released, and this information was subsequently disclosed to the complainant. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request relates to unfinished documents. Regulation 12(4)(d) is therefore engaged and DfC correctly withheld some of the information under this exception. The public interest favoured maintaining the exception. The Commissioner also finds that DfC did not comply with its obligation under regulations 5(2) (duty to make information available on request) and 14(2) (time limits for refusing a request) of the EIR as DfC did not respond to the request within the statutory time limit of 20 working day
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 14(2)(1); EIR 5(2)
7 Jul 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the application of the Public Sector Equality Duty to university enterprise departments. The Equality and Human Rights Commission denied holding information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that EHRC does not hold information falling within the scope of the request and, as it informed the complainant of this fact within 20 working days, it has therefore complied with its obligation under section 1(1)(a) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Equality and Human Rights Commission
7 Jul 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Waltham Forest about council evictions. She specified her preference to receive a response in hard copy format. The London Borough of Waltham Forest responded to the request within the time limit of 20 working days under section 10(1) of the FOIA. It also met its obligations under section 11 of the FOIA by providing the complainant with a paper response via post within the required time scale. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 11
View Waltham Forest Council
7 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of correspondence with the government relating to a munitions manufacturer. Brighton and Hove City Council had failed to issue a response at the date of this notice. 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, under the FOIA, to the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Brighton and Hove City Council
7 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Sussex Police about a specified report. Sussex Police has failed to respond to this request. The Commissioner requires Sussex Police to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. Sussex Police must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Sussex Police
6 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the NHS Commissioning Board (NHS England) relating to the number of patients treated at the Nightingale Hospitals during the pandemic. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS England 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 requires the public authority 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 NHS England
6 Jul 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information on any advice provided to the Prime Minister on the use of public money to fund the “Getting ready for Brexit” media campaign following the passing of the Benn Act [the European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019]. This Act required the UK Prime Minister to seek an extension to the Brexit withdrawal date, then scheduled for 31 October 2019, in certain circumstances. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office, on the balance of probabilities, does not hold any information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Cabinet Office
6 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (“DCMS”) information regarding correspondence between DCMS and Nominet UK between 22 March 2021 and 12 April 2021. DCMS had failed to provide a substantive response by the date of this notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that DCMS failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires DCMS to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a substantive response, in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA, to the request. DCMS 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 for Culture, Media and Sport
6 Jul 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested from South Leverton Parish Council (SLPC) copies of feedback forms collected by its Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group, following a ‘Call for Land’. SLPC refused the request on the grounds that it was manifestly unreasonable within the meaning of regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that SLPC was entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR to refuse the request. However, by failing to conduct an internal review it breached regulation 11(4) of the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(4)(b)
6 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested certain emails held by Wealden District Council (the council) that relate to three separate planning applications. Whilst the council provided some information to the complainant in response to his request, certain additional information was released only after the internal review process was complete. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has, on the balance of probabilities, now provided the complainant with all the information which it holds that is relevant to the request. However, as the council failed to provide all the information within 20 working days, the Commissioner has found there to be a breach of regulation 5(2) of the EIR. Furthermore, as the council failed to provide its internal review response within 40 working days, it has also breached regulation 11(4) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 5(2)
View Wealden District Council
6 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested from Keelby Parish Council (“the Council”) information regarding a recent planning application. 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 Regulation 5(2) of the Environmental Information Regulations (“the EIR”). The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a substantive response, in accordance with its obligations under the EIR, 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 Freedom of Information Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
6 Jul 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant submitted a request to the London Borough of Lewisham (the Council) seeking a copy of a report about a proposed housing development. The Council provided the complainant with a copy of the report but redacted certain parts of it on the basis of section 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA. The Council subsequently disclosed a less redacted version of the report to the complainant and adopted the position that the remaining redactions were exempt on the basis of regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR. The Commissioner has concluded that the remaining redactions are exempt from disclosure on the basis of regulation 12(5)(e) and that in all the circumstances of the request the public interest favours maintaining the exception. However, the Commissioner has also concluded that the Council breached regulation 5(2) of EIR by not responding to the request in 20 working days and by belatedly disclosing parts of the requested information.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 5(2)
View Lewisham Council
5 Jul 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information regarding the possible deletion of information following an FOI request (Freedom of Information) or SAR (Subject Access Request). Development Bank Wales refused the request relying on section 14(1) (vexatious request) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Development Bank Wales was entitled to rely on section 14(1) to refuse the request. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0193 withdrawn.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
5 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Board of Governors of Ballyclare Secondary School (“the School”) including minutes, accounts and annual reports. The School has failed to provide a substantive response to either the complainant’s original request or her refined request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the School has breached sections 10(1) and 17(5) by not issuing a proper response or refusal notice within the 20 working day time period as set out in the FOIA.
The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
• To provide a substantive response to both the original and refined requests.
The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 17
5 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested from Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council (“the Borough Council”) information relating to two specific planning applications. By the date of this notice the Borough Council had not provided a substantive response to this request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Borough Council has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached regulation section 5(2) of the EIR.
The Commissioner requires the Borough 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 Borough 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 Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council
5 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Newcastle City Council (“the Council”) regarding a Safer Bridges Scheme and the company Eljay Research Limited. The Council had failed to provide a substantive response by the date of this notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Regulation 5(2) of the Environmental Information Regulations (“the EIR”). The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a substantive response, in accordance with its obligations under the EIR, 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 Freedom of Information Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Newcastle City Council
5 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Sheffield City Council (the Council) relating to Community Triggers meeting notes. The Council refused to comply with the request, citing section 14(1) (vexatious request) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has not demonstrated that the request was vexatious and was therefore not entitled to rely on section 14(1) to refuse it. She also found the Council did not comply with its obligations under section 17(5) (refusal of request). The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a fresh response to the request that does not rely on section 14(1) of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14; FOI 17
View Sheffield City Council
5 Jul 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about disclosure logs. The Department of Health and Social Care (‘DHSC’) has advised that it does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: On the balance of probabilities, DHSC does not hold the information the complainant has requested in the two parts of his request and has complied with section 1(1)(a) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require DHSC to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Department of Health and Social Care
5 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Central Bedfordshire Council (“the Council”) regarding the business rates paid in relation to specific property.
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 Central Bedfordshire Council
2 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Brighton and Hove City Council (“the Council”) relating to the rationale and cost of erecting on a barrier at a specific location. 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: EIR 5(2)
View Brighton and Hove City Council
2 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Brighton and Hove City Council (“the Council”) relating to vehicle movements at a specific development site. The complainant also policy requested documents relating to the development. 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 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 Brighton and Hove City Council
1 Jul 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested from Blaby District Council various information relating to his address. The Council refused to comply with the requests under section 14(1) (vexatious requests) of the FOIA and regulation 12(4)(b) (manifestly unreasonable requests) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to apply section 14(1) of the FOIA and regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR. However, the Council breached regulation 14 of the EIR by failing to inform the complainant of it’s refusal under that legislation. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b); EIR 14; FOI 14(1)
View Blaby District Council
1 Jul 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Hastings Borough Council information relating to the cancellation of Penalty Charge Notices. The Council withheld some of the requested information under section 31(1)(a) (prejudice to the prevention or detection of crime) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was not entitled to withhold the requested information under section 31(1)(a). The Commissioner has also found that the Council was not entitled to withhold the requested information under section 31(1)(g) / 31(2)(c) (ascertaining whether circumstances which would justify regulatory action in pursuance of any enactment exist or may arise), and that the Council has breached the requirement of section 10. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the requested information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 31(1); FOI 31(1)(a)
View Hastings Borough Council
30 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from the Health & Safety Executive about a seed treatment. The complainant was unhappy with the response they received and requested an internal review. The Health & Safety Executive failed to respond to this request. The Commissioner requires the Health & Safety Executive to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under the EIR. Health & Safety Executive must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11
View Health and Safety Executive
30 Jun 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested from Chapel-en-le-Frith Parish Council (“the Council”) emails concerning a multi-use games area (“MUGA”). This request was made in two parts. The Council disclosed the information at part one of the request, with redactions to personal data under section 40(2) (personal data) of the FOIA. The Council entirely withheld the information at part two of the request under section 40(2).
The complainant’s grounds for complaint were that the Council had not disclosed all of the information within the scope of the first part of the request. The complainant also objected to the redactions made under section 40(2) in the information that had been disclosed in response to part one of the request.
In relation to the second part of the request, the complainant objected to the withholding of information under section 40(2).
The Commissioner’s decision is first that the request was for environmental information and so the EIR apply.
In relation to part one
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1); FOI 13
30 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Ceredigion County Council (“the Council”) regarding the costs it incurred in relation to the investigation and prosecution of the company Farm Box Meats Ltd. 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 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 FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Ceredigion County Council
30 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Caerphilly County Borough Council (“the Council”) relating to the Council’s correspondence with Hazrem regarding an Environmental Impact Assessment.
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.
A response has subsequently been provided and no steps are required.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Caerphilly County Borough Council
30 Jun 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Northamptonshire Police information about its receipt and handling of Subject Access Requests (“SARs”) in the years 2018, 2019, and 2020. Northamptonshire Police refused the request as it considered that complying with it would exceed the cost limit under section 12 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Northamptonshire Police was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of the FOIA (cost limit) to refuse to comply with this request. However, the Commissioner also finds that Northamptonshire Police has not complied with its duty to provide advice and assistance under section 16 (advice and assistance) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires Northamptonshire Police to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Provide advice and assistance to the complainant on refining his request. Northamptonshire Police must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commi
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16
View Northamptonshire Police
29 Jun 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to his deceased father’s tenure as a magistrate. The Ministry of Justice (the ‘MOJ’) did not handle the request under FOIA, but informed the complainant in writing that no information was held. The Commissioner has considered whether the request was valid for the purposes of section 8 of FOIA (request for information) and whether the MOJ has provided the information it holds in accordance with section 1 of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was valid for the purposes of section 8 of FOIA. She also finds, on the balance of probabilities, that the MOJ does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the MOJ to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 8
View Ministry of Justice
29 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Hackney about a specified individual. The London Borough of Hackney has failed to respond to this request. The Commissioner requires the London Borough of Hackney to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The London Borough of Hackney must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View London Borough of Hackney