19 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of correspondence and meeting notes from the London Borough of Hackney (the Council) since 1 March 2020 regarding an installation on Regents Canal. 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, 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 Hackney
18 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about complaints and staff qualifications. St Augustine’s School (‘the School’) disclosed information relevant to one part of the request. It relied on section 12(1) of the FOIA (cost exceeds the appropriate limit) to refuse to comply with two parts and withheld information requested in the remaining five parts of the request under section 40(2) of the FOIA (personal data). The complainant disputed the School’s reliance on section 12(1) and section 40(2). During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the School withdrew its reliance on section 40(2) with regard to two parts of the request and released this information to the complainant. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: The School is entitled to rely on section 12(1) of the FOIA to refuse to comply with the request for information about informal complaints in parts 1 and 2 of the complainant’s request, as it would exceed the appropriate cost limit to do so. The Commissioner
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 12; FOI 16; FOI 40
18 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted seven information requests to the Health and Safety Executive (“the HSE”) for various information relating to a Gas Safe Register investigation into a property and related correspondence.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the HSE has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.
The Commissioner requires the HSE to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
The HSE must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Health and Safety Executive
18 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Highways England (“HE”) relating to third party claims and Corclaim (Shakespeare Martineau LLP). The request had previously been refused as vexatious and was the subject of an earlier decision notice where HE was instructed by the Commissioner to issue a fresh response that did not rely on section 14(1). HE did so, stating that it did not hold some of the requested information and additionally citing section 12 FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probability, HE does not hold the information, as stated. HE has also correctly cited section 12 of the FOIA. However, she finds HE in breach of the legislation by not providing advice and assistance in line with its duty under section 16 FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further action to be taken. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal EA/2020/0338 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 12; FOI 16
View National Highways
18 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to FOIA requests and SARs Subject Access Requests) from West Yorkshire Police (‘WYP’). Ultimately, the complainant disputed the accuracy of the information provided in response to part two of his request. The Commissioner has addressed this through consideration of whether WYP has provided the information it holds in accordance with section 1 of FOIA in relation to part two of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is, on the balance of probabilities, that WYP has provided the information it holds in relation to this request. The Commissioner does not requires WYP to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2020/0361 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View West Yorkshire Police
17 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (“PHSO”) about statutory and regulatory details supporting its decisions. By the date of this notice the PHSO had failed to provide a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the PHSO has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the PHSO to respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
17 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made a 110 part request for information relating to electroconvulsive therapy, serious incidents, restraints, seclusion and medication errors. The Trust refused to comply with the requests as it said it would exceed the cost limit under section 12 FOIA to do so.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust was correct to apply section 12 FOIA and that it was not therefore obliged to comply with the requests. However the Commissioner considers that the Trust failed to provide the complainant with advice and assistance in accordance with its obligations under section 16 FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide the complainant with advice and assistance in accordance with the requirements of section 16 FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
17 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has made three requests for information about Planning enforcement matters. Three Rivers District Council had failed to respond to any of the requests at the date of this notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has failed to respond to any of the requests within 20 working days and has therefore breached Regulation 5(2) of the Environmental Information Regulations (“the EIR”) in respect of each request. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a substantive response, under the EIR, to all three requests.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Three Rivers District Council
16 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Meridian Surgery (the Surgery) about their prescribing statistics since 2015 for Eczema preparations and for any audits relating to Asthma and Eczema care that they had conducted. The Surgery had failed to provide a substantive response by the date of this notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Surgery failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Surgery to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a substantive response, under the FOIA, to the request. The Surgery 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
16 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a copy of a report into the conduct of the previous Chief Executive. Caerphilly County Borough Council relied on section 40(2) and, later, section 31(1)(c) of the FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly relied upon section 31(1)(c) of the FOIA to withhold the requested information and that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. However, as the Council failed to issue a refusal notice, citing all the exemptions on which it later came to rely, within 20 working days, it breached section 17(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 31
View Caerphilly County Borough Council
16 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a “meta-request” for information created or acquired as a result of a previous request he had made. The Parliamentary and Health Services Ombudsman withheld the requested information and relied on section 40(1) of the FOIA to do so. The Commissioner’s decision is that information falling within the scope of the request would be the complainant’s own personal data. The PHSO was therefore entitled to rely on section 40(1) of the FOIA in order to withhold it. However, the Commissioner also finds that, in failing to issue its refusal notice within 20 working days, the PHSO breached section 17(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 40(1)
View The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
16 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested a copy of a report of local housing needs. The Commissioner’s decision is that Great Waldingfield Parish Council incorrectly withheld the sections named “Executive Summary and Key Findings” and “Next Steps of the report on the basis of regulations 12(5)(e) and 12(5)(f); however it correctly engaged regulation 12(5)(e) to withhold the remainder of the withheld information. Furthermore, the council did not comply with the requirements of regulation 11(4) because it provided an internal review later than the statutory time period of 40 working days. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the sections of the Great Waldingfield Housing Survey report which are named “Executive Summary and Key Findings” and “Next Steps. 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
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 12(5)(f)
16 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested from Maidstone Borough Council (“the Council”) information relating to the proposed garden community development at Lenham Heath. The Council stated that it did not hold information to some parts of the request. It also refused to disclose information under regulations 12(4)(b) and 12(5)(e) of the EIR to the remaining parts of the request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council did not hold information to some parts of the request, and that it complied with the requirements of regulation 9 (advice and assistance) of the EIR. The Commissioner also decided that the Council has correctly applied regulations 12(4)(b) and 12(5)(e) to the remaining parts of the request. Therefore, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 12(4); EIR 5(1)
View Maidstone Borough Council
16 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested pensions related information from Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service (‘SFRS’). SFRS 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 probabilities, SFRS does not hold the information. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service
16 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Cabinet Office about specified contracts and correspondence. 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
13 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a SEND inspection report. The Council stated that it did not hold the requested information, albeit that it did not respond within the statutory time for compliance. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council does not hold the requested information. However the Commissioner finds that the Council failed to respond to the request in accordance with sections 1 and 10(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Bromley Council
13 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Nottingham City Council (“the Council”) information in relation to an investigation report. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to withhold the information under section 40(1) of the FOIA. However, in providing a response outside of statutory time periods, it breached section 10(1). The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 40(1)
View Nottingham City Council
13 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the use of the Hare PCL:SV test. Devon Partnership NHS Trust (“the Trust”) initially refused to accept the request as being valid before later refusing the request as vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust has failed to demonstrate that the request was vexatious and is therefore not entitled to rely on section 14(1) of the FOIA to refuse it. She also finds that the Trust failed to respond to the request with 20 working days and thus also breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Trust to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a fresh response, to the request, which does not rely on section 14(1) of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 14
View Devon Partnership NHS Trust
12 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
In two, multi-part, requests the complainant has requested from the Selby Area Internal Drainage Board (‘the Board’) specific Board minutes recording decisions associated with its historical treatment of piece workers, and related matters. The Board’s position was that it did not hold any relevant information, which the complainant disputed. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: The Board breached section 1(1) of the FOIA as it advised the complainant that it did not hold any information relevant to the requests of 21 October 2018 and 17 February 2019, when it did hold some information within the scope of the requests which it had not communicated to him. On the balance of probabilities, this information is the only relevant information the Board holds. The Board breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it did not communicate to the complainant the relevant information it holds within 20 working days of the requests. The Commissioner requires the Board to take the following steps to
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
12 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
In two, multi-part, requests the complainant has requested from the Selby Area Internal Drainage Board (‘the Board’) specific Board minutes recording decisions associated with its historical treatment of piece workers, and related matters. The Board’s position was that it did not hold any relevant information, which the complainant disputed. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: The Board breached section 1(1) of the FOIA as it advised the complainant that it did not hold any information relevant to the requests of 21 October 2018 and 17 February 2019, when it did hold some information within the scope of the requests which it had not communicated to him. On the balance of probabilities, this information is the only relevant information the Board holds. The Board breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it did not communicate to the complainant the relevant information it holds within 20 working days of the requests. The Commissioner requires the Board to take the following step to e
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
12 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to application for petroleum licences. The Department for the Economy (Northern Ireland) (“the Department”) refused to disclose the information, citing regulations 12(5)(d), 12(5)(e) and 13 of the EIR as a basis for non-disclosure. 1. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department has correctly applied regulations 12(5)(d) and 13 to the requested information. She has therefore not considered its application of regulation 12(5)(e). 2. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2020/0360 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12; EIR 13
View Department for the Economy (Northern Ireland)
12 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Bristol City Council (the Council) about the Council’s policies and procedures regarding the use of risk alerts on case files of Adult Care service users. The Council had failed to provide a substantive response by the date of this notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that Bristol City Council (the Council) failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a substantive response, under the FOIA, to the request. The Council must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Bristol City Council
12 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the MOJ regarding confiscation of knives from people entering family courts in London during certain time periods. The MOJ refused to disclose the requested information, citing sections 31 and 38 of the FOIA as a basis for non-disclosure.
2. The Commissioner’s decision is that neither section is engaged and therefore the MOJ is not entitled to rely upon either exemption.
3. The Commissioner requires the MOJ to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation:
• disclose the requested information to the complainant.
4. The MOJ 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 31; FOI 38
View Ministry of Justice
11 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Wandsworth (“the Council”) relating to the Council’s Prevent strategy. 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
View London Borough of Wandsworth
11 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on the consultation by the Chartered Trading Standards Institute with commercial organisations regarding a review of the used car guidance it provides. The Commissioner’s decision is that BEIS has appropriately applied FOIA section 43(2) - Commercial interests to withhold the information held within the scope of the request. She also finds that on the balance of probabilities no information is held in respect of points 3 and 4 of the request. 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/2020/0348 allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1); FOI 43(2)
View Department for Business and Trade
11 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted two requests for information to the Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner for Staffordshire. The Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner took four months to issue substantive responses to these requests. Accordingly the Information Commissioner’s decision is that the Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner failed to comply with section 10(1) of FOIA. Since the Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner has now issued responses the Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
11 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from the Council in relation to a specified planning application. The Council disclosed some information to the complainant, however it refused to disclose the remainder, citing regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR to the withheld information. Therefore the Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
11 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) for information on how DWP had applied the Public Sector Equality Duty in relation to DWP’s “People & Locations” strategy. The Commissioner’s decision is that DWP is entitled to withhold the legal advice falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner concludes however, that DWP has breached sections 10(1), 17(1) and 17(5) as it did not comply with its obligations under section 1(1) within the statutory time frame. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 17; FOI 42
View Department for Work and Pensions
10 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made a 110 part request for information relating to electroconvulsive therapy, serious incidents, restraints, seclusion and medication errors. The Trust refused to comply with the requests as it said it would exceed the cost limit under section 12 FOIA to do so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust was correct to apply section 12 FOIA and that it was not therefore obliged to comply with the requests. The Commissioner also considers that the Trust provided the complainant with advice and assistance in accordance with its obligations under section 16 FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2020/0323 struck out.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health NHS Trust
10 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested copies of correspondence from the London Borough of Islington (the Council) relating to planning proposals regarding the current and future use of the Former Part of the Archway Methodist Central Hall site. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has failed to carry out a reconsideration (internal review) of a response it provided, under the Environmental Information Regulations (the EIR), within 40 working days and has therefore breached Regulation 11 of the EIR. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Reconsider how it responded to the original request and inform the complainant of the outcome of that reconsideration in accordance with Regulation 11 of 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 secti
Exemptions cited: EIR 11
View Islington Council
10 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a court order relating to Brookwood Cemetery Ltd. Woking Borough Council (the Council) stated that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision notice. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2020/0328 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Woking Borough Council
10 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made a 110 part request for information relating to electroconvulsive therapy, serious incidents, restraints, seclusion and medication errors. The Trust refused to comply with the requests as it said it would exceed the cost limit under section 12 FOIA to do so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust was correct to apply section 12 FOIA and that it was not therefore obliged to comply with the requests. However the Commissioner considers that the Trust failed to provide the complainant with advice and assistance in accordance with its obligations under section 16 FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide the complainant with advice and assistance in accordance with the requirements of section 16 FOIA. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2021/0021 struck out.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Bradford District Care NHS Trust
9 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to Northamptonshire Police’s handling of interviews under caution. Northamptonshire Police asked for confirmation of the requester’s identity which they declined to give. Northamptonshire Police refused to deal with the request, citing section 8(1)(b) (request for information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that, in the circumstances of this case, Northamptonshire Police was not entitled to consider the request did not meet the criteria for a valid request at section 8(1)(b) of the FOIA without confirmation of the complainant’s identity. The Commissioner requires Northamptonshire Police to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a fresh response to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: FOI 8
View Northamptonshire Police
9 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust (the Trust) about the decision by the Trust to conduct a recent post-operation survey. The Trust had failed to provide a substantive response by the date of this notice. The Commissioner’s decision is that Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS 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 Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust
9 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the introduction of a new computer system. Greater Manchester Police (‘GMP’) initially refused the request on cost grounds, citing section 12(1) of the FOIA. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, GMP withdrew its reliance on section 12(1) and disclosed some of the previously withheld information to the complainant. It withheld the remainder citing section 31 (law enforcement), section 31(3) (the ‘neither confirm nor deny’ provision for law enforcement), section 38 (health and safety), section 40(2) (personal information) and section 43(2) (commercial interests). The complainant has disputed the application of the exemptions, and also believed that GMP held further information which it had not disclosed in relation to part 4 of his request. It became apparent after a forensic review of the withheld information in order to prepare this notice, that GMP had marked some of the withheld information as being exempt under sect
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 14; FOI 31; FOI 36; FOI 38; FOI 40(2); FOI 41; FOI 43(2); FOI 44
View Greater Manchester Police
9 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Ealing (the Council) regarding any equality impact assessment carried out prior to the implementation of a new Limited Traffic Neighbourhood, LTN21. 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, 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
9 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the yearly amounts Kent Police has paid informants and the upper limit payable. Kent Police confirmed it held information within the scope of part (1) of the request for the yearly amounts paid but refused to provide it, citing sections 30(1) and (2) (investigations and proceedings) of the FOIA. It refused to confirm whether it holds information within the scope of part (2) of the request for the upper limit payable. The Commissioner has investigated Kent Police’s handling of part (1) of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that Kent Police was entitled to rely on section 30(1) and (2) of the FOIA to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30
View Kent Police
9 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Hackney (“the Council”) relating to the Council’s procurement of architectural services for specific lots within a framework. 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
View London Borough of Hackney
6 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a specific briefing note, minutes of a meeting and any information relating to a previous FOI request referred to the ICO and which was the subject of an appeal to the First Tier Tribunal. The Council originally applied section 14 FOIA as it considered the request to be vexatious but subsequently responded to the request confirming that it did not hold information falling within the scope of the first part of the request under section 1(1)(a) FOIA and provided some information located falling within the scope of the second part of the request. The complainant does not accept that he has been provided with all recorded information held by the Council falling within the scope of both parts of his request. The Commissioner considers that on the balance of probabilities no further information is held falling within the scope of the request under section 1(1)(a) FOIA other than that which has now been provided. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken. In
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Worcester City Council
5 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Home Office about trafficking victims. The Home Office has failed to respond to this request. The Commissioner requires the Home Office to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The Home Office must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
5 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the address or addresses of the retailer(s) from which two specific lottery tickets were purchased. The position of the Gambling Commission (‘the Commission’) is that it does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: On the balance of probabilities, the Commission does not hold the information the complainant has requested and has complied with section 1(1)(a) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the Commission to take any remedial steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2020/0342 consent order.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Gambling Commission
5 Nov 2020Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from East London NHS Foundation Trust (the “Trust”) information about aspects of its mental health treatment services. The Trust refused to provide the requested information, citing section 12(1) of the FOIA – that the cost of complying would exceed the appropriate limit for compliance. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust has correctly cited section 12(1) and provided advice and assistance to the complainant in line with its duty under section 16(1) of the FOIA. However, the Trust breached section 10(1) of the FOIA by not responding within the statutory time for compliance. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any further steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2020/0316 struck out.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 12; FOI 16
View East London NHS Foundation Trust
5 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested speed data from a SID (Speed Indicator Device). Hertfordshire County Council (the council) responded that it does not hold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council does hold the requested information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a fresh response 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 1
View Hertfordshire County Council
4 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the contract for its interim Chief Executive from Sheffield City Council (the “Council”). The Council provided some information, said some was not held and withheld the remainder citing the exemptions at sections 40 (personal information) and 43 (commercial interests) of the FOIA. During the Commissioner’s investigation further information from within the contract was disclosed.
The Commissioner’s decision is that, where the Council advised that information was not held, the Commissioner accepts that, on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, it was entitled to do so. She also finds that it was entitled to rely on section 43 to withhold the remaining information in the contract. The complainant did not contest the citing of section 40 so this has not been considered. No steps are required. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2020/0344 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View Sheffield City Council
3 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Ealing (“the Council”) relating to low traffic neighbourhoods (LTN’s).
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 Ealing Council
3 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Lamerton Parish Council (“the Council”) about meeting minutes and communications regarding the Neighbourhood Planning Group. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, the Council does hold the requested information. By failing to provide the complainant with the requested information, the Council has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA. By failing to provide an initial response to the complainant within 20 working days, the Council has also breached section 10(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the requested documents. When providing these, the Council is entitled to redact any personal data. 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 pursua
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10(1)
3 Nov 2020Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Ealing (“the Council”) relating to the risk assessments carried out prior to the installation of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods. 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
View Ealing Council
2 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a transmission log of the faxes received by the Central London County Court during specified time periods. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) denied holding the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the MoJ does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal UT PTA refused.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Ministry of Justice
2 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding whether disciplinary action was taken against a specified employee. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is entitled to rely on section 40(2) to withhold this information. The Commissioner does not require DWP to take any steps regarding this request. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2020/0343 appeal withdrawn.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Department for Work and Pensions
2 Nov 2020Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested from West Berkshire Council (the Council) information in relation to a local football ground. The Council refused to comply with the request under regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR (manifestly unreasonable request).
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly applied regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR.
The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
View West Berkshire Council