3 Dec 2019Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
In two series of requests, the complainant – a firm of solicitors acting on behalf of a client - has requested information associated with the relocation of a Heathrow Express depot as part of the HS2 rail project. With regard to the first series of requests, HS2 released information relevant to some of the requests, withholding some under regulation 12(5)(e)(commercial confidentiality). HS2 said it did not hold other information. Finally, HS2 relied on the exception under regulation 12(4)(b) to refuse to comply with one request (manifestly unreasonable request). It voluntarily provided the complainant with a small amount of relevant information outside of the EIR. With regard to two further requests, HS2 indicated it does not hold information falling within the scope of request 2.1 and has relied on regulation 12(4)(b) to refuse to comply with request 2.2. The complainant considers: HS2 holds information in relation to five of the requests; incorrectly relied on regulation 12(4)(
Exemptions cited: EIR 11; EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 12(4)(b); EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 14; EIR 9
View High Speed Two (HS2) Limited
2 Dec 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested meeting minutes in which Hadleigh Town Council (the Council) resolved to take disciplinary action against a named individual. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council 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 Council to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
2 Dec 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information with regards to a server failure. Harrogate Borough Council (the council) responded to advise it does not hold the requested information, other than what he has previously been provided. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council does not hold any further information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps but has addressed its refusal to carry out an internal review in the ‘other matters’ section at the end of the decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
2 Dec 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Cherwell District Council (“the Council”) about council property tenants and unauthorised short-term/holiday lets. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the requests within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the Council to respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Cherwell District Council
2 Dec 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to care arrangements for children. The Commissioner’s decision is that Lancashire County Council (the Council) 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 Council to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Lancashire County Council
2 Dec 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Liverpool City Council (the Council) information broadly concerning the arrangements relating to stray dogs. The Council refused the request under section 14(1) of the FOIA on the basis that it was vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to provide sufficient evidence to support its position to refuse the request for information. Therefore, the Council is not entitled to rely on section 14(1) of the FOIA with regard to the request. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Issue a fresh response to the request for information as required by section 1 of the FOIA and without relying upon section 14 of 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 wit
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View Liverpool City Council
2 Dec 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted three requests for information regarding particular events held by the University of Bath (the University). The University refused to comply with any of the three requests and cited section 14(1) of the FOIA (vexatious requests) as its basis for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the University has correctly applied section 14(1) of the FOIA to the requests. The Commissioner does not require the University to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
29 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Calverton Parish Council information about a decision to grant a licence for agricultural use of a piece of land. The Council has failed to respond to this request.
The Commissioner requires the Council to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under 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
29 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Greater London Authority (GLA) seeking information as to whether the Mayor, Sadiq Khan, had an official car and if so the costs of providing this. The GLA refused to confirm or deny whether it held any information falling within the scope of the request on the basis of sections 31(3) (law enforcement) and 38(2) (health and safety). The Commissioner has concluded that section 38(2) is engaged and that the public interest favours maintaining this exemption.
Exemptions cited: FOI 38
View Greater London Authority
29 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a variety of information concerning the London Borough of Waltham Forest’s (the London Borough’s) Fire Risk Assessments (FRAs). The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Waltham Forest Council
28 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Somerset West and Taunton Council about households accommodated by the authority. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council 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.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
28 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant’s company requested information about “blocks” under the London Borough of Lewisham’s (the London Borough’s) ownership. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Lewisham Council
27 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Somerset West and Taunton Council about unauthorised short-term holiday lets by council tenants. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council 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.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
27 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Keelby Parish Council (“the Council”) relating to individual councillors’ comments on a specific planning application. 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.
The Council must 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
27 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Bristol City Council (“the Council”) relating to the Cumberland Basin Redevelopment. 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.
The Council must 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 Bristol City Council
27 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from City of York Council (“the Council”) relating to an investigation into the exonerated Deputy Leader. 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.
The Council must 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 York City Council
27 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information regarding complaints about coroners. The Ministry of Justice has withheld some information under section 44 (Prohibitions on disclosure) of the FOIA by virtue of section 139 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 and section 40(2) (Personal information) of the FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Ministry of Justice has applied section 44(1)(a) of the FOIA appropriately by virtue of section 139 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005.
The Commissioner does not require the Ministry of Justice to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0471 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 44
View Ministry of Justice
27 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made several requests for information from the Police Service of Northern Ireland (‘PSNI’) relating to traffic management companies engaged by the PSNI for events in certain named towns in Northern Ireland. The PSNI responded to 8 of the requests, however it then applied section 14(1) of the FOIA to the complainant’s subsequent requests.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the PSNI has correctly applied section 14 (1) of the FOIA to the complainant’s requests and therefore requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View Police Service of Northern Ireland
27 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the West Midlands Combined Authority (“WMCA”) relating to the Midlands Connect Rail Programme. The Commissioner’s decision is that WMCA has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires WMCA to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
WMCA must issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
WMCA must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View West Midlands Combined Authority
27 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) seeking declassification of a document concerning the political situation in Italy in 1947. The FCO sought to withhold the requested information on the basis of section 23(1) (security bodies) or, in the alternative, section 24(1) (national security) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that the withheld information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 23(1) or section 24(1) of FOIA. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0450 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 23; FOI 24
27 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust (the “Trust”) about the roles of Head of Department/Lead Consultant for Gynaecology and Gynaecological Oncology. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the requests within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. As responses have been issued, the Commissioner does not require the Trust to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust
27 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the London Borough of Hounslow (the Council) seeking information about the disposal of a particular piece of land. The Council initially sought to withhold the information on the basis of section 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA before arguing that the information was exempt from disclosure on the basis of regulation 12(5)(e) (commercial confidentiality) and regulation 12(5)(f) (interests of the person who provided the information to the public authority) of the EIR. The Commissioner has concluded that the information falling within the scope of the request is exempt from disclosure on the basis of regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR and that in all the circumstances of the request the public interest favours maintaining the exception.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View London Borough of Hounslow
27 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Gravesham Borough Council about unauthorised short-term holiday lets by council tenants. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council 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.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Gravesham Borough Council
26 Nov 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested NHS England to disclose information relating to an investigation about the treatment of black and ethnic minority staff at NHS North East London Commissioning Support Unit (NEL CSU) commissioned in August 2016. A small amount of information was initially disclosed but the remainder (with the exception of question 5 and 7) was withheld under sections 21, 31, 40(2) and 43 of the FOIA. In relation to question 5 and 7 of the request, NHS England initially refused to confirm or deny the information is held citing section 40(5)(b)(i). During the Commissioner’s investigation all elements of the request were resolved except questions 5 and 7. In relation to questions 5 and 7 NHS England revised its position, withdrew the application of section 40(5)(b)(i) and disclosed the recorded information it holds. The complainant then disputed that he had received all the recorded information that is held. This then became the focus of the Commissioner’s investigation. The C
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View NHS England
26 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on a meeting between the Department for International Trade (“DIT”) and BAE Systems. The Commissioner’s decision is that DIT has appropriately applied sections 27(1) – International relations and 43(2) – Commercial interests. She has determined that there is not an overriding public interest in disclosure of this specific information and the public interest therefore favours maintaining the exemptions. DIT is correct in its application of section 40(2) – Personal information, to withhold one name. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 27; FOI 40(2); FOI 43(2)
View Department for International Trade
26 Nov 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about ten buildings in Berkshire with aluminium composite material (“ACM”) cladding from Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue Service (“RBFRS”). During the Commissioner’s investigation, RBFRS provided most of the requested information but refused to provide the remainder, citing section 38(1)(b) (health and safety) of the FOIA. It also considered that some information it had identified fell outside the scope of the request.
In respect of the one high rise building for which RBFRS has refused to disclose any information, the Commissioner finds that section 38 is only partially engaged. Where engaged, the public interest lies in maintaining the exemption.
In respect of the two buildings which RBFRS considers fall outside the scope of the request, the Commissioner’s decision is that they do fall within the request’s scope. In failing to clarify this aspect of the request, RBFRS breached section 16(1) of the FOIA.
The Commissioner requires R
Exemptions cited: FOI 16; FOI 38
26 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Sussex Police about their adherence to the National Security System Policy. Sussex Police has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires Sussex Police to provide a response to the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Sussex Police
26 Nov 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Fareham Borough Council (the Council) information relating to meetings held between the Council and a company called “Cratus Group”. The Council provided some information in their initial response. The Council disclosed additional information during the Commissioner’s investigation and confirmed that it did not hold any further information. The complainant considered that more information must be held.
The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council holds no further information beyond that already disclosed and has therefore discharged its duty under section 1(1) of the FOIA. However, it failed to discharge this duty within 20 working days and thus breached section 10 of the FOIA.
The Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Fareham Borough Council
26 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the fraud scoring matrix used by the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau. The Commissioner’s decision is that the City of London Police 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 City of London Police to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View City of London Police
26 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about policies on emails and disabled people. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) 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 MOJ to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Ministry of Justice
26 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about meetings concerning a tree-felling operation, from South Yorkshire Police (“SYP”). SYP provided some information but withheld the remainder, citing sections 40(2) (personal information), 30(1)(a) (investigations and proceedings), 31(1)(a) (law enforcement), 38(1)(b) (health and safety) and 42(1) (legal professional privilege) of the FOIA. SYP subsequently withdrew reliance on sections 38 and 42 of the FOIA. The complainant has accepted that personal data may be redacted. The Commissioner’s decision is that SYP is entitled to rely on the exemptions at sections 30(1) and 31(1) of the FOIA, and that the public interest favours maintaining these exemptions. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30; FOI 31
View South Yorkshire Police
25 Nov 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding complaints about the Children’s Services department of Hampshire County Council. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, Hampshire County Council does not hold any information in 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 did not provide the complainant with adequate advice and assistance and therefore breached its section 16 duty. However, as information has been provided as a result of subsequent requests no further action is required. 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. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0464 dismissed.
The Commissioner does no
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 16
View Hampshire County Council
25 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the numbers of cancelled operations. Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) failed to respond to this request for information and the Commissioner’s decision is that in doing so the Trust breached section 10(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. 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 FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust
25 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the minutes of a Fitness to Practice Panel hearing in respect of a specific Doctor. The General Medical Council withheld the requested information because it considered that disclosing it would breach data protection principles. The Commissioner’s decision is that the GMC has correctly applied section 40(2) of the FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0461 Under Appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View GMC
25 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information regarding costs for the Javelin Park waste management facility. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, Gloucestershire County Council has located all of the information held within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1)
View Gloucestershire County Council
25 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of manuals used to train NHS England managers how to advertise job vacancies on the NHS Jobs website.
The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, NHS England does not hold the requested information.
The Commissioner does not require NHS England to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View NHS England
25 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested statistical about the geographic locations from which responses to a consultation were made. The Welsh Government refused the request because it estimated that the cost of complying would exceed the appropriate limit. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Welsh Government is entitled to rely on section 12 of the FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0448 allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View Welsh Government
22 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has asked the Ministry of Housing, Communities and local Government (“the MHCLG”) for a copy of a report about CON29 services. The MCLHG confirmed that it holds the report which the complainant seeks but, on the grounds that the report relates to the formulation and development of government policy, the Department refused to disclose it in reliance on section 35(1)(a) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MHCLG has properly applied the provision of section 35(1) and therefore it is entitled to withhold the CON29 Report it holds.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35
View Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
22 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of bank statements, payment lists and staff expense claims from March 2017 – March 2018.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied section 40(2) to the withheld information. The Commissioner considers the Council to have breached section 1(1) of the FOIA by failing to provide the complainant with all of the information it holds within the statutory timeframe of 20 working days.
The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
22 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a freedom of information request to Katherine Warington School (the School) for a copy of a tender submission for a school uniform contract. The School refused the request under the section 43(2) (commercial interests) exemption. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 43(2) was correctly applied and the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
22 Nov 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Department for Education (“DfE”) regarding the trial of a reception baseline assessment in schools. The DfE refused to provide some of the requested information citing section 35(1)(a) – the formulation and development of government policy and section 40(2) – third party personal data. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DfE has correctly withheld the requested information under section 35(1) and section 40(2). However, she finds that the DfE did not comply with section 10(1) and section 17(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the DfE to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 17; FOI 35(1)(a); FOI 40(2)
View Department for Education
22 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested a variety of information relating to emails and documents sent between employees of the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (“the Council”). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Regulation 5(2) of the Environmental Information Regulations (“the EIR”).
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Barking and Dagenham Council
22 Nov 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested photos within a particular report. The London Borough of Waltham Forest refused the request as “repeated” because it had already supplied the whole report. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough was entitled to rely on section 14(2) of the FOIA to refuse the request. However it failed to inform the complainant that it was relying on section 14(2) and thus breached section 17(5) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(2); FOI 17
View Waltham Forest Council
22 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about valuation reports produced for the council by Lambert Smith Hampton. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough of Croydon (“the Council”) has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Regulation 5(2) of the Environmental Information Regulations (“the EIR”).
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View London Borough of Croydon
22 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of the Mayor’s Appeal Fund trustees’ meeting. The London Borough of Enfield stated that it did not “hold” the requested information for the purposes of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough does not hold the information for the purposes of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 3
View Enfield Council
21 Nov 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the ICO a copy of its policy in compliance with Schedule 1 Part 4 of the Data Protection Act 2018 (having an appropriate policy document in place when processing personal data on reliance on a condition in Part 1, 2 or 3 of the schedule). The ICO initially applied section 22 of the FOIA to withhold the information. During a review of its handling of the request the ICO changed its position and denied holding information within the scope of the request. However, during the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the ICO reverted back to its original position applying section 22 of the FOIA to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the ICO was correct to apply section 22 of the FOIA in this case and that the public interest in favour of disclosure is outweighed by the public interest in favour of maintaining the exemption. She however found that the ICO had not complied with the section 45 FOIA code of practice in tha
Exemptions cited: FOI 22
View Information Commissioner
21 Nov 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information showing that HS2 Limited (HS2) is aware of the reduction in forecast of GDP and has made this known to the Department for Transport (DfT) and what updates it has made as a result of this. HS2 identified a report intended to advise the DfT of this and withheld the information under section 36 of the FOIA. The Commissioner considers the information should have been considered under the EIR as it is environmental information and as such HS2 applied the regulation 12(4)(d) and 12(4)(e) exceptions to withhold the report. The Commissioner’s decision is that HS2 has incorrectly engaged regulation 12(4)(e) but has correctly engaged regulation 12(4)(d) but that the public interest favours disclosing the information. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2020/0007 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 12(4)(e)
View High Speed Two (HS2) Limited
20 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Brighton and Hove Council (“the Council”) regarding parking permits. The Council disclosed some information but stated that it was unable to provide the rest due to issues with obtaining the information from its systems. The Commissioner has used her discretion to apply section 40(2) – third party personal data, to the remainder of the information which it holds. The Commissioner considers that this information is exempt from disclosure under section 40(2) and does not require the public authority to take any steps as a result of this decision notice. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0452 under appeal. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0457 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Brighton and Hove City Council
20 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to communications on the subject of John Stonehouse. The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) denied holding the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the AGO did not hold information within the scope of the request. She therefore considers that the AGO complied with its obligations under section 1(1) (general right of access to information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0460 Appeal Dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Attorney General's Office
20 Nov 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made two freedom of information requests for costs of implementing wifi for rail passengers. The Department for Transport (DfT) refused the requests under the section 43(2) (commercial interests) exemption. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 43(2) was correctly applied and the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View Department for Transport