13 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of the Register of Relevant Digital Service Providers. The Information Commissioner’s Officer withheld the information, relying on section 44(1) of the FOIA to do so, because it believed that disclosure would breach the Data Protection Act. The Commissioner’s decision is that disclosure of the information would breach the Data Protection Act and therefore the ICO has correctly relied on section 44(1) of the FOIA to withhold it. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 44
View Information Commissioner
12 Jan 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Three Rivers District Council about parking permits. Three Rivers District Council has failed to respond to this request. The Commissioner requires Three Rivers District Council to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. Three Rivers District Council must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Three Rivers District Council
12 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Surrey Heath Borough Council (the Council), namely an unredacted copy of the investigation report into the payment of an additional duties allowance to the then Chief Executive. The Council refused to provide the requested report, citing sections 40 (personal information), 41 (information provided in confidence) and 36 (prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs) of the FOIA. The Commissioner considered the Council’s application of section 41 to the withheld information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly applied section 41 to the withheld information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41
View Surrey Heath Borough Council
12 Jan 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Caldecote Parish Council (“the Council”) information relating to the risk assessment carried out prior to the renovation of a playground. By the date of this notice the Council had not provided a substantive response to this 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
12 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to statutory authority. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) refused to comply with the request on the basis that to do so would exceed the appropriate limit, citing section 12(1) (cost of compliance) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MoJ correctly applied section 12(1) and found that there is no breach of section 16(1) (duty to provide advice and assistance) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0079 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Ministry of Justice
12 Jan 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to mobile phone extraction technology. Surrey Police ultimately refused to confirm or deny holding the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that Surrey Police failed to issue, within 20 working days, a refusal notice specifying the exemptions on which it eventually came to rely. She therefore finds that Surrey Police breached section 17 of the FOIA in responding to the request. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17
View Surrey Police
12 Jan 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Greater London Authority about the Mayor of London. The Greater London Authority has failed to respond to this request. The Commissioner requires the Greater London Authority to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The Greater London Authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Greater London Authority
12 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding off-street parking enforcement powers for Oxford City Council. The Commissioner’s decision is that Oxford City Council has correctly applied the exemption at section 42(1) to withhold information. She has also decided that on a balance of probabilities no further information is held by the council. Commissioner requires no steps to be taken. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0039 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 42
View Oxford City Council
12 Jan 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of a letter to the Senior Committee Services Officer at Caerphilly County Borough Council from the Acting Clerk of Van Community Council. Caerphilly County Borough Council refused the request citing section 42 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Caerphilly County Borough Council was entitled to rely on section 42 to refuse the request. However, the Commissioner has also recorded a breach of section 17(1) of the FOIA as the response exceeded the specified timescales stipulated under section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps. First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Information Rights appeal EA/2021/0037 appeal allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 42
View Caerphilly County Borough Council
12 Jan 2021Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested planning related information in relation to a proposed development scheme. Shropshire Council (the ‘Council’) initially withheld all the information in scope under Regulation 12(4)(d) of the EIR but, following an internal review, it disclosed some of the requested information to the complainant. Additionally, during the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the Council disclosed a further three documents to the complainant. It maintained that Regulation 12(4)(d) applied to the remaining information in scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was correct to consider this request under the EIR. She also finds that it has correctly applied Regulation 12(4)(d) of the EIR to the remaining withheld information. She concludes that the weight of the public interest lies in maintaining the Council’s application of this exception. The Commissioner also finds that the Council breached Regulation 5(2) of the EIR by failing to respond to
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 5(2)
View Shropshire Council
11 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information, in a multi-part request, relating to complaints/allegations made against Hampshire Constabulary, including against the Chief Constable, and the associated correspondence and actions taken. Hampshire Constabulary provided some relevant information but refused to provide the remainder, citing section 12(1) (cost of compliance) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Hampshire Constabulary correctly applied section 12(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0032 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
11 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested noise monitoring data in relation to the construction of a road near their property. Lancashire County Council initially stated that it did not hold the data requested however it subsequently changed the response to cite regulation 12(4)(b) to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that Lancashire County Council is entitled to rely upon regulation 12(4)(b) and that the public interest rests in maintaining this exception. However the Commissioner finds that the council breached regulation 14(2) in its handling of the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b); EIR 14(2)(1)
View Lancashire County Council
11 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant, on behalf of the Pubs Advisory Service, has requested particular correspondence about stocking requirements from the Pubs Code Adjudicator (‘the PCA’). The PCA withheld the information it holds under sections 36(2)(b)(i), 36(2)(b)(ii) and 36(2)(c) of the FOIA (prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs), section 31(1)(g) and 31(2)(c) (law enforcement) and section 43(2)(commercial interests). It considered that the public interest favoured maintaining these exemptions. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: At the time of the request, the requested information was exempt information under section 36(2)(b)(i) and section 36(2)(b)(ii) and the public interest favoured maintaining these exemptions. The Commissioner does not require the PCA to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View Pubs Code Adjudicator
11 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
In a 12 part request the complainant, on behalf of the Pubs Advisory Service, has requested information about alternative arbitrators from the Pubs Code Adjudicator (‘the PCA’). The PCA advised that it does not hold the information requested in five parts of the request. It provided information within the scope of six parts and withheld the remaining information requested in one part under section 41(1) of the FOIA (information provided in confidence). The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: On the balance of probabilities, the PCA does not hold information falling within the scope of parts 7 to 11 of the request and complied with section 1(1)(a) of the FOIA. The information requested in part 12 of the request is exempt from disclosure under section 41(1) of the FOIA as it is information that was provided to the PCA in confidence. The Commissioner does not require the PCA to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 41
View Pubs Code Adjudicator
11 Jan 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust (“the Trust”) relating to the Trust’s expenditure on automation and new technologies in pathology services since the Carter Report.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.
No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust
8 Jan 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made two requests for information about a particular property and relationship with a contractor. The London Borough of Hackney allocated reference numbers to both requests, but had failed to respond to either request at the date of this notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough failed to respond to either request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA in respect of both requests. The Commissioner requires the London Borough to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a substantive response, under the FOIA, to the requests which it dealt with under references 6498 and 6640.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View London Borough of Hackney
7 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested names and other details of persons charged with murder via postal charge requisitions from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”). The MPS refused to provide the information citing the exemptions at sections 30(1) (Criminal investigations, 38(1) (Health and safety) and 40(2) (Personal information) of the FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that section 40 of the FOIA is properly engaged so the other exemptions cited have not been considered. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Metropolitan Police Service
7 Jan 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to specific properties. Dorset Council disclosed some information and confirmed that further information was not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that Dorset Council failed to disclose information within the statutory time limit and breached section 10(1) but that it disclosed all the relevant information it holds and complied with section 1. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0034 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10(1)
View Dorset County Council
7 Jan 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the NHS Commissioning Board (NHS England) about information relating to cases eligible for NHS Continuing Health Care. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS England has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires NHS England to respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View NHS England
6 Jan 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) concerning contracts between the FCDO and Torchlight Group Ltd. A substantive response to the request had not been issued by the date of this notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FCDO 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 the FCDO to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Having confirmed that information is held within the scope of the request: either disclose the requested information or issue a refusal notice in accordance with the requirements of section 17 of the FOIA. 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
Exemptions cited: FOI 17
View Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
6 Jan 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Ealing (the Council) about the registrants of domain names used by the Council. By the date of this notice the Council had not provided a substantive response to this request. 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, 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 Ealing Council
6 Jan 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) about the job description and person specification for the role of Information Governance Consultant. The Trust had failed to provide a substantive response to this request by the date of this notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Trust to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a substantive response, under the FOIA, to the request. The Trust 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 Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals
5 Jan 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to a stray dogs kenneling contract with Animal Wardens Ltd. Liverpool City Council disclosed some information and withheld other information under the exemptions for personal data (section 40) and commercial interests (section 43(2)). The Commissioner’s decision is that Liverpool City Council has failed to demonstrate that section 43(2) is engaged. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the withheld information, excluding that withheld under section 40(2), to the complainant. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0040 appeal allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43(2)
View Liverpool City Council
5 Jan 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Insolvency Service about insolvencies in the utilities sector. The Insolvency Service asked the complainant to clarify this request, and once he did so, responded to the clarified request by disclosing some information sought and by explaining that it did not any further information in the scope of the request. The complainant questioned whether the Insolvency Service held further information falling within the scope of the request and also raised a number of concerns with the Commissioner about its handling of his request. The Commissioner has concluded that on the balance of probabilities the Insolvency Service does not hold any further information falling within the scope of this request. However, the Commissioner has concluded that the Insolvency Service breached section 10(1) of FOIA by failing to respond to the complainant’s clarified request within 20 working days.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View The Insolvency Service
5 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of a contract between a company called Kier and its subcontractor. Kier contracted with the council to erect fences in an area, and its subcontractor contracted with Kier to carry out the necessary work. The complainant also requested details on the costs for part of the job. The council provided information on the overall costs of erecting the fences but said that it does not hold a copy of the contract between Kier and its subcontractor. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on a balance of probabilities, the council was correct to state that it has disclosed all of the information which it holds falling within the scope of the request to the complainant. The Commissioner does not therefore require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View North Tyneside Council
5 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested legal advice in relation to a specific planning matter. Buckinghamshire Council withheld the requested information under the exceptions for the course of justice (regulation 12(5)(b)) and confidentiality of proceedings (regulation 12(5)(d)). The Commissioner’s decision is that Buckinghamshire Council has correctly applied the exception in regulation 12(5)(b) to the requested information 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(5)(b)
View Buckinghamshire Council
4 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) seeking information it held about the her father who died in a car accident in Pakistan in 1964 whilst working at as the Second Secretary at the High Commission in Lahore. The FCDO explained that it did not hold any information falling within the scope of the complainant’s request. The complainant disputed the FCDO’s response. The Commissioner is satisfied that on the balance of probabilities the FCDO does not hold any information falling within the scope of the complainant’s request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
4 Jan 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about Highways England’s handling of particular requests for information. Highways England has categorised the request as a vexatious request under section 14(1) of the FOIA and has refused to comply with it. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: The complainant’s request is a vexatious request under section 14(1) of the FOIA and Highways England is not obliged to comply with it. Highways England breached section 17(5) of the FOIA as it did not issue its refusal notice to the complainant within the necessary timescale. The Commissioner does not require Highways England to take any remedial steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0015 disposed of by consent order.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14; FOI 17
View National Highways
4 Jan 2021Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested all documents and emails regarding the 63rd Session of the UN’s Commission on Narcotic Drugs. The Home Office initially refused to provide the requested information citing section 35(1)(a) of the FOIA (the formulation or development of government policy). It subsequently revised its position and cited section 12(1) of the FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse to deal with the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office was not entitled to rely on section 12(1) to refuse to comply with the request. The Commissioner also finds that the Home Office breached section 10(1) of the FOIA by failing to respond to the request within 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the Home Office to issue a fresh response to the request which does not rely on section 12 of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 12
View Home Office
4 Jan 2021Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested various follow on questions to his previous request in respect of the Robin Holden report. Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board refused to respond to the request on the basis that it does not have to respond to questions if it would mean creating new information or giving an opinion or judgement that is not already recorded. Following the Commissioner’s investigation, it did provide a response to the questions. The Commissioner’s decision is that Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board has now complied with its obligations in respect of section 1 of the FOIA, however in failing to provide its response within the timescales specified under the FOIA, has breached section 10 of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board
4 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Ministry of Defence (MOD) seeking information about the visits to the Royal Air Force Air Cadets Squadron Gibraltar by personnel from its parent Norfolk and Suffolk Wing. The MOD refused to comply with the request on the basis of section 12(1) of FOIA because the estimated cost of doing so exceeded the appropriate cost limit. The complainant disputed the MOD’s reliance on section 12(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner is satisfied that the MOD can rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View Ministry of Defence
4 Jan 2021Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Ministry of Defence (MOD) seeking information about the use of Reaper and Typhoon aircraft in Operation Shader and for the number of sorties, and location of them, that RAF Reaper aircraft had flown outside of Operation Shader. The MOD provided the complainant with information regarding Reaper and Typhoon activities as part of Operation Shader. However, it withheld the information concerning the use of RAF Reaper outside of Operation Shader on the basis of sections 26(1)(b) (defence) and 27(1)(a) and (c) (international relations) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that the withheld information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 26(1)(b) of FOIA and that in all of the circumstances of the case the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0035 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 26
View Ministry of Defence
24 Dec 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about alleged investigations involving the Duke of Windsor during 1938, from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”).
The MPS advised the complainant that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the civil standard of the balance of probability, the information is not held. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Metropolitan Police Service
23 Dec 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested all correspondence between Ealing Council and Clarion Housing from June 2018 onwards. The Council disclosed some information, and withheld some on the basis that it was exempt from disclosure under regulation 12(5)(b) of the Environmental Information Regulations. The Commissioner’s decision is that Council has correctly applied regulation 12(5)(b). The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0025 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View Ealing Council
23 Dec 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested specified contents of the Parliamentary Counsel Office’s intranet. The Cabinet Office relies on 14(1) (vexatious request) of the FOIA to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that Cabinet Office reliance on section 14(1) was incorrect. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0022 appeal allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View Cabinet Office
23 Dec 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information, consisting of a statutory building notice, from the London Borough of Croydon London Borough of Croydon relied on the following Regulations, 12(3) and 12(5)(e) to withhold requested information.
The Commissioner’s decision is that London Borough of Croydon incorrectly relied on the said exceptions to withhold the requested information.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(3); EIR 12(5)(e)
View London Borough of Croydon
22 Dec 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information regarding policies on climate change programming. The British Broadcasting Corporation 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 the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View BBC
22 Dec 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about a particular company. The Financial Conduct Authority provided some information, stated that it held no information in respect of one part of the request, withheld some information and refused to confirm or deny whether any further information was held. At various points the FCA relied on sections 31, 43 and 44 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FCA was entitled to rely on section 44 to withhold information in the manner that it has. She also finds that it was entitled to rely on section 31(3) of the FOIA to neither confirm nor deny holding information within the scope of part of the request. Finally, the Commissioner finds that the FCA’s considerations of the public interest test were completed within a reasonable timeframe however, because the refusal notice it subsequently issued did not cite all the exemptions on which the FCA later came to rely, it breached section 17 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require a
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 31; FOI 44
View Financial Conduct Authority
22 Dec 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information within the contract for the former CEO of South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (“the Trust”). The Trust provided some information but withheld the former CEO’s annual leave entitlement, citing section 40(2) of the FOIA for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust is not entitled to rely on section 40(2) due to the balance between the legitimate interests and the data subject’s interests or fundamental rights and freedoms favouring the disclosure of the former CEO’s annual leave entitlement. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the former CEO’s annual leave entitlement.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
22 Dec 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested details of Covid-19 grants. South Northamptonshire Council provided some information but also relied on section 31(1)(a) of the FOIA to withhold information. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 31 of the FOIA is engaged and that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View North Northamptonshire Council
21 Dec 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from South Yorkshire Police (“the Police”), information regarding a named police officer, including complaints made about them, their disciplinary record and reports relating to misconduct. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Police are entitled to rely on section 38(2) to refuse to confirm or deny whether it holds any information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require the Police to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 38
View South Yorkshire Police
21 Dec 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about parking enforcement at various hospitals. Cardiff and Vale University Health Board (‘the Health Board’) provided some information and stated other information was not held. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the Health Board disclosed some additional information and withheld information relating to part 9 of the request under section 43 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Health Board has incorrectly applied the provisions of section 43 and the exemption is not engaged. The Commissioner requires the Health Board to disclose the withheld information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 43
View Cardiff and Vale University Health Board
21 Dec 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from London South Bank University (“the university”) about the Confucius Institute for Traditional Chinese Medicine, which operates at the university. The university provided the complainant with the majority of the relevant written agreements, but redacted some information relating to funding under section 43(2) of the FOIA – prejudicial to commercial interests. The Commissioner’s decision is that the exemption is not engaged in respect of the withheld information. The Commissioner requires the university to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose all of the information withheld under section 43(2), to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View London South Bank University
21 Dec 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested addresses, postcodes and property ownership information about local authority-owned blocks. The public authority disclosed some of the information in scope including an aggregated total of the number of apartments in blocks with less than 5 units broken down by ownership information. It however withheld individual apartment door numbers relying on the exemption at section 40(2) FOIA (personal data).
The Commissioner has concluded that the public authority was entitled to rely on the exemption at section 40(2) FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Barking and Dagenham Council
21 Dec 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Chapel St Leonards Parish Council information in relation to a lease agreement. The Council stated that it did not hold the requested document but offered an explanation related to this matter.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council did not on the balance of probabilities hold any further information within the scope of the request.
Therefore, the Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
18 Dec 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Cheetwood Community Primary School (“the School”) on various aspects of its responses to the Covid-19 pandemic, including information on contingency plans, decisions made, funding and training. The Commissioner’s decision is that the School failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. However, as the School has now provided the complainant with a response, the Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View HIGHWOODS COMMUNITY PRIMARY SCHOOL
18 Dec 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made a request for information relating to the official address for Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital. Despite the intervention of the Commissioner, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) has not provided a response to the request in accordance with the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust has failed to respond to the complainant’s request within 20 working days of receipt and has therefore breached section 10(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Trust to provide the complainant with a response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals
18 Dec 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from King David Primary School (“the School”) on various aspects of its responses to the Covid-19 pandemic, including information on contingency plans, decisions made, funding and training. The Commissioner’s decision is that the School failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. However, as the School has now provided the complainant with a response, the Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View THE KING DAVID PRIMARY SCHOOL
18 Dec 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Al-Furqan Primary School (“the School”) on various aspects of its responses to the Covid-19 pandemic, including information on contingency plans, decisions made, funding and training. The Commissioner’s decision is that the School failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. However, as the School has now provided the complainant with a response, the Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
18 Dec 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about ‘non-conformances’ in its forensic services from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”). The MPS provided some information but withheld the remainder citing sections 31(1)(a) and (b) (Law enforcement) and 40(2) (Personal information) of the FOIA. It also advised that to undertake any further work in respect of part (1) of his request would engage section 14(1) (Vexatious requests) of the FOIA.
The complainant advised the Commissioner that he only wished her to consider the MPS’s response to part (2) of his request. He agreed that names and any other information which could identify any parties could be withheld. The Commissioner finds that neither section 40(2) nor 31(1) are engaged.
In respect of part (2) of the request, the Commissioner requires the MPS to disclose all headings with each spreadsheet; disclose all information withheld under section 40(2), other than staff names / operational names / exhibit references / cr
Exemptions cited: FOI 31; FOI 40
View Metropolitan Police Service