29 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Cabinet Office about PPE contracts. The Cabinet Office has failed to complete its public interest test considerations within a reasonable time in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA. The Cabinet Office must provide a substantive response to the request within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17
View Cabinet Office
29 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the House of Commons (HoC) seeking a copy of a letter he believes was received by the Clerk and Speaker of the HoC regarding the arrest of a member of the HoC during the months of July and August 2020. The HoC relied on section 34(2) of FOIA to refuse to confirm or deny whether it held the requested information. The Commissioner is satisfied that the HoC can rely on section 34(2) to refuse to confirm or deny whether it holds any information falling within the scope of the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 34
View Corporate Officers of the House of Commons
29 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested various information relating to social care and housing from the London Borough of Croydon (the Council). 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 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 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 London Borough of Croydon
29 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested correspondence regarding the purchase of land for the development of a bypass. West Sussex County Council (“the Council”) initially refused the request under section 40(2) of the FOIA (personal data). The Council later issued a revised response to the complainant within which it withheld the information under regulation 13 of the EIR (personal data) and regulation 12(5)(e). The Council later issued a further revised response to the complainant within which it withheld the information under regulation 13 and regulation 12(5)(d) of the EIR (confidentiality of proceedings).
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly cited regulations 13 and 12(5)(d) of the EIR as a basis for non-disclosure.
Therefore the Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(d); EIR 13
View West Sussex County Council
29 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Liverpool City Council (“the Council”) about the number of premise variation applications that were rejected and granted in areas where Special Cumulative Impact Policies (“SCIPS”) were in place.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to respond to the request within twenty working days and therefore breached section 10(1) of the FOIA.
As the request has since been responded to, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further steps in relation to this complaint.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Liverpool City Council
29 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Liverpool City Council (“the Council”) relating to the Council’s “Liverpool without Walls” project.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to respond to the request within twenty working days and therefore breached section 10(1) of the FOIA.
As the request has since been responded to, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further steps in relation to this complaint.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Liverpool City Council
29 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Liverpool City Council (“the Council”) about correspondence between Council licencing staff and elected members and the operator/licensee of Grand Hall in Liverpool in relation to Roscoe Gardens. The complainant also requested a copy of the land use agreement for the aforementioned site as well as the name of the Council representative who signed the land use agreement.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to respond to the request within twenty working days and therefore breached section 10(1) of the FOIA.
As the request has since been responded to, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further steps in relation to this complaint.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Liverpool City Council
28 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO, now part of the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, FCDO) for correspondence between the European Commission and the UK Representative to the EU about the appointment of a UK Commissioner to the EU. The FCO withheld the information on the basis of the exemptions contained at sections 27(1)(b) and 27(2) (international relations) and section 41(1) (information provided in confidence) of FOIA. The Commissioner is satisfied that the FCO was entitled to rely on section 27(1)(b) to withhold all of the information falling within the scope of the request and that in all of the circumstances of the case the public interest favoured maintaining the exemption..
Exemptions cited: FOI 27
View Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
28 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Sheffield City Council (SCC) information, in general terms, about the qualifications of staff working in its Adult Social Care Commissioning Service. SCC disclosed some information to the complainant, but the complainant believed it held further information. During the Commissioner’s investigation, SCC located further, relevant information. The Commissioner’s decision is that SCC failed to disclose all the information it held within 20 working days, which is a breach of section 1 (General right of access) and section 10(1) (Time for compliance) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires SCC to disclose to the complainant the number of officers in the Adult Social Care Commissioning Service that have qualifications in “allied disciplines”.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Sheffield City Council
28 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to a meeting which took place between His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales and Alun Milburn on 27 March 2000. DHSC refused to disclose the requested information held under section 37(1)(aa) FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that DHSC has correctly applied section 37(1)(aa) FOIA in this case. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 37(1)(aa)
View Department of Health and Social Care
28 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Liverpool City Council (“the Council”) about the number of premise license applications that were rejected and granted while special cumulative impact policies (“SCIPs”) were in place.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to respond to the request within twenty working days and therefore breached section 10(1) of the FOIA.
As the request has since been responded to, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further steps in relation to this complaint.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Liverpool City Council
28 Jun 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested from Caerphilly County Borough Council (the Council) information about work it has carried out on, and outside, her property over the last 30 years. The Council initially disclosed a schedule of works extracted from computerised records, but the complainant believed that it held more information. The Council subsequently located extensive manual files on works conducted by it between 1995 and 1999. It revised its position and said that under section 12 of the FOIA it was not obliged to comply with the request, due to the costs of doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that while the Council should have dealt with the request under the EIR, it was not obliged to comply with the request on the grounds that it was manifestly unreasonable within the meaning of regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR, due to the burden that complying would impose on it. However, the Commissioner found that the Council breached regulation 11(4) (Representations and reconsiderations) of
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(4)(b)
View Caerphilly County Borough Council
28 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Government Actuary's Department (GAD) seeking information about the cash flows for the unfunded public sector pension schemes and information about the financial impact on such schemes of shortfalls in actual GDP growth versus assumed growth. The GAD directed the complainant to information falling within the first part of his request that was already in the public domain but sought to withhold information falling within the second part of his request on the basis of section 35(1)(a) (formulation and development of government policy) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that this information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 35(1)(a) and that in all the circumstances of the request the public interest favours maintaining exemption. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0184 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35
28 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
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: FOI 10
View Brighton and Hove City Council
28 Jun 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding council byelaws and policies. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, Kirby Muxloe Parish Council has disclosed all of the information held that is within the scope of the request. However, she finds that it contravened its obligations under section 10 of the FOIA in failing to respond in a timely manner in accordance with the legislation. The Commissioner considers that the council breached section 17(1) of the FOIA by not issuing a valid refusal notice within 20 working days of the request which stated that the requested information is not held. The Commissioner does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 17
28 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the funding of the Prime Minister’s holiday to Mustique from the
Cabinet Office. The Cabinet Office advised that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, the requested information is not held. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Cabinet Office
28 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Croydon (“the Council”) relating to the legal costs the Council has incurred in relation to a specific planning application. By the date of this notice the Council had not provided a substantive response to the request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that 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 London Borough of Croydon
28 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from Highways England (HE) about the costs associated with damage from a road traffic incident in 2016 and audits, inspections and examinations of the damaged highway structure and matters pertaining to its replacement. HE refused to provide the requested information, citing section 14(1) – that the request was vexatious. HE later accepted the Commissioner’s view that the information was environmental and that regulation 12(4)(b) – manifestly unreasonable was the appropriate exception to cite. The Commissioner’s decision is that Regulation 12(4)(b) is not engaged. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a fresh response to the request that does not rely on regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
View National Highways
28 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested minutes of Local Plan Working Group minutes. Breckland District Council withheld the requested information under the exception for material in the course of completion – regulation 12(4)(d) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that Breckland District Council has correctly applied regulation 12(4)(d) and that the public interest favours maintaining the exception. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d)
View Breckland Council
28 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Department for Transport (DfT) about complaints made against the former minister Chris Grayling. DfT says it is not obliged to comply with the request under section 12 of the FOIA, as it would exceed the appropriate cost and time limit to do so. The Commissioner’s decision is that DfT is not obliged to comply with the request under section 12 and is satisfied that DfT met its obligations under section 16 to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require DfT to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Department for Transport
28 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police (“GMP”) information relating to hate crimes. By the date of this notice GMP had not provided a substantive response to the request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that GMP has 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 to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
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 Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Greater Manchester Police
25 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about action taken against Highways England Ltd and on internal reviews. The Information Commissioner refused the request as vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was vexatious and therefore the ICO was entitled to refuse it. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0168 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Information Commissioner
25 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust (“the Trust)’s interactions with React Specialist Cleaning LTD, including any invoices. The Trust provided invoices but redacted some information from the invoices on the basis of section 43(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Trust has failed to demonstrate that the exemption as set out in section 43(2) of FOIA is engaged in relation to the information that has been redacted. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose unredacted copies of the invoices.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust
25 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to occasions when the Welsh Government has sought Prince’s Consent for legislation. The Welsh Government provided some information but refused the remainder under sections 37(1)(a) and 37(1)(aa) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is environmental information within the meaning of regulation 2(1)(c) of the EIR. The Commissioner requires the Welsh Government to respond to the request under the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 14
View Welsh Government
24 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has submitted two requests for information to HM Revenue & Customs in relation to referrals of tax evasion submitted by two specified legal entities. HMRC refused to confirm or deny it held information within the scope of the requests, relying on the exemption provided under section 31(3) (law enforcement)of FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that HMRC was entitled to rely on section 31(3) FOIA as the basis for not complying with the duty to confirm or deny whether it held the requested information on both occasions.
The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(3)
24 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to bus lane convictions, specifically the location and number of penalty charge notices (PCN) issued by the five traffic enforcement cameras that generate the most PCNs. Transport for London (TfL) has withheld the requested information, citing section 31(1)(b) and 31(1)(g) (law enforcement) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the subsections are properly engaged and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require TfL to take any steps in relation to this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Transport for London
24 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has submitted two requests for information to HM Revenue & Customs in relation to referrals of tax evasion submitted by two specified legal entities. HMRC refused to confirm or deny it held information within the scope of the requests, relying on the exemption provided under section 31(3) (law enforcement)of FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that HMRC was entitled to rely on section 31(3) FOIA as the basis for not complying with the duty to confirm or deny whether it held the requested information on both occasions.
The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(3)
24 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
In a series of requests, the complainant requested information about ‘Varioguard’, a type of road barrier. Highways England has aggregated the cost of complying with the most recent request with the cost of complying with earlier requests; requests to which it had responded. Highways England refused to comply with the current request under section 12(1) of the FOIA as it considers the cost of doing so would exceed the appropriate limit. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: Highways England is entitled under section 12(4) of the FOIA to aggregate the cost of complying with the request of 17 July 2020 with the cost incurred through its compliance with requests of 13 May 2020, 5 June 2020 and 12 June 2020. The Commissioner finds that the cost of complying with the complainant’s current request would exceed the appropriate limit under section 12(1) of the FOIA and that Highways England is not obliged to comply with it. In the circumstances there was no breach of section 16(1) (advice
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View National Highways
24 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the number of BBC TV and radio appearances of Alistair Campbell between 1 Jan 2018 and March 2021. 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 did not fall inside FOIA. She therefore upholds the BBC’s position and requires no remedial steps to be taken in this case.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
24 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the curriculum for a particular course offered by Warwick Medical School. The University Council of the University of Warwick did not respond to this request. It later confirmed that it considered that the request was vexatious and was relying on section 17(6) of the FOIA to not issue a refusal notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was vexatious and therefore the University was not obliged to comply with it. She also finds that the University was entitled to rely on section 17(6) of the FOIA as it would have been unreasonable in the circumstances to have expected the University to have issued a refusal notice. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14; FOI 17(6)
View The University of Warwick
23 Jun 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information with regards to flooding at a local park. North East Lincolnshire Borough Council (the council) responded that the information was not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the information is not held. But she did find that the council breached regulations 14(2) and 14(3)(a) in not issuing a valid refusal notice in accordance with the EIR. As the Commissioner has found the information is not held, she does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 14(3); EIR 14(2)
View North East Lincolnshire Council
23 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the applications for heavy goods and public service vehicle operators’ licences and centres. The Council refused the requests under section 14(1) of the FOIA as it considered them to be vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that Harrogate Borough Council is entitled to rely on section 14(1) to refuse the requests. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0187 allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
23 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Department relating to a maintenance review. The Department of Finance (“the Department”) refused to disclose the information, citing section 33 of the FOIA as a basis for non-disclosure.
The Commissioner’s decision is that section 33 of the FOIA is not engaged in relation to the requested information.
The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Disclose the requested information to the complainant.
The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 33
View Department of Finance
23 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the MPS about a specified document. The MPS has failed to respond to this request. The Commissioner requires the MPS to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The MPS must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Metropolitan Police Service
23 Jun 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a variety of information regarding health and safety, with particular emphasis on an incident he alleges took place in 2016. Monkshouse Primary School refused the requests as vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the requests were vexatious and the School was therefore entitled to rely on section 14(1) of the FOIA to refuse them. However, as the School failed to respond to Request 1 within 20 working days, it breached section 17(5) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14; FOI 17
View HURST PRIMARY SCHOOL
23 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information that he believes should have been considered as part of the inspection of a particular school. The Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills refused the request as vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was vexatious and therefore Ofsted was entitled to rely on section 14(1) of the FOIA to refuse it. The Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills
23 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to four hunts, including internal correspondence, license information and copies of correspondence between the public authority and representatives of the aforementioned hunts. The Forestry Commission refused to provide the information, citing regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR (manifestly unreasonable request). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Forestry Commission has failed to demonstrate on what grounds regulation 12(4)(b) is engaged and therefore is not entitled to rely on the exemption. The Commissioner requires the Forestry Commission to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Issue a fresh response to the requests in question which do not rely upon 12(4)(b) of the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
View Forestry Commission
23 Jun 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested documentation relevant to the decision by Sheffield City Council not to generate a safeguarding report regarding the care of her late mother, including emails between officers, advice taken from third parties and the status of any ongoing reviews. The complainant particularly required to see any assessments that led to no report being made. The Commissioner is satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that Sheffield City Council does not hold the requested information and complied with section 1(1) FOIA (Right of access to information). The Commissioner’s decided that Sheffield City Council took an excessive length of time to respond substantively to the request in breach of Section 10(1) FOIA (Time for compliance). The Commissioner did not require Sheffield City Council to take any further steps to comply with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Sheffield City Council
23 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested the text of the top ten most and least correctly answered questions on both the car and motorcycle theory tests for a three year period. The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency withheld the information, relying on section 36(2)(c) of the FOIA (otherwise prejudice the conduct of public affairs) to do so. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 36(2)(c) of the FOIA is engaged in respect of this information and that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency
23 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Witherley Parish Council (“the Council”) relating to the Council’s Neighbourhood Development Plan. 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
23 Jun 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested Highways England (HE) to disclose the information upon which it relied to negate a previous FOIA response in 2016 (part one of the request) and any information about the termination of the pain/gain process being due to insurers’ unwillingness to pay the relevant costs (part two of the request). It responded by saying that the 2016 response was an error and apologised to the complainant for this. Later it stated that it holds no recorded information. During the Commissioner’s investigation HE adopted the Commissioner’s interpretation of the request and what recorded information could potentially fall in scope and conducted searches of its records. For part one of the request, HE disclosed all the recorded information it holds, except third party personal data in accordance with section 40 of the FOIA and an excel spreadsheet under section 43. For part two, it advised the Commissioner that it does not hold the requested information. For part one of the requ
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View National Highways
23 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the possible use of personal email addresses by officers at the Royal Borough of Greenwich (the council). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was entitled to rely on section 14(1) when refusing to comply with the request, on the basis that it was vexatious. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps as a result of this decision notice. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0160 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View Royal Borough of Greenwich
23 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the applications for heavy goods and public service vehicle operators’ licences and centres. The Council refused the requests under section 14(1) of the FOIA as it considered them to be vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that Harrogate Borough Council is entitled to rely on section 14(1) to refuse the requests. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0187 allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
22 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested policies relating to the placing of patients on the Covid-19 clinically extremely vulnerable list, as well as policies relating to the re-registering of patients to other GPs.
The Commissioner’s decision is that Beacon Medical Group 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.
No steps are required. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2023/0057 appeal struck out. Information Tribunal EA/2021/0144 appeal struck out.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
22 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested data about pacemaker appointments. Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust initially withheld some of the information before later disclosing it.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust did not discharge its duty under section 1(1) of the FOIA within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust
22 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested cost information relating to a specific employment tribunal case. HMRC refused to confirm or deny whether the information was held under section 44(2) (statutory prohibition) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that HMRC was correct to rely on section 44(2) of the FOIA to neither confirm nor deny whether the information was held. The Commissioner does not require HMRC to carry out any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 44
22 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Sheffield City Council (“the Council”) information relating to the generation, approval and dissemination of a letter written by Councillor Bryan Lodge regarding the replacement of trees. 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 Sheffield City Council
22 Jun 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Innovate UK (“IUK”), part of UK Research and Innovation (“UKRI”) about the Catapult organisations sponsored by IUK. The Commissioner’s decision is that UKRI has appropriately withheld the requested minutes in reliance of section 41(1). The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2021/0185 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41
View UK Research and Innovation
22 Jun 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from West Yorkshire Police (WYP) information about the operation of its Public Protection Units (PPUs). The Commissioner’s decision is that WYP failed to respond to the request within 20 working days, which is a breach of section 1 (General right of access) and section 10(1) (Time for compliance) of the FOIA. As the information has since been disclosed to the complainant, the Commissioner requires no steps
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View West Yorkshire Police
22 Jun 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about laptops held by Ammanford Town Council (‘the Council’). The Council provided some information, stated other information was not held and advised that some information was held within Council offices and could not be retrieved at that time due to the Covid 19 pandemic. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the Council disclosed some additional information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council does not hold any further recorded information relevant to the request. The Commissioner also finds that the Council breached section 10 of the FOIA in failing to comply with section 1 within the appropriate timescale. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10