15 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made a two requests in respect of assets (and specifically one residential property) owned by Bolton Borough Council. The Council refused both requests as vexatious under section 14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act. The Commissioner’s decision is that Council is entitled to refuse request 1 under section 14(1), but is not entitled to refuse request 2. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Issue a fresh response to request 2 under the terms of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View Bolton Council
15 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding ministerial misconduct complaints. The Cabinet Office refused to comply with the request under section 12(1) of the Act as it considered compliance with the request would exceed the appropriate limit. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office has not demonstrated that compliance with the request would exceed the appropriate limit and is therefore not entitled to rely on section 12(1). The Commissioner requires the public authority to issue a fresh response to the request which does not rely on section 12(1) of the Act. 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 12
View Cabinet Office
15 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information in relation to possible renovation works on a property. Relying on regulation 13(5A)(5)(B) the public authority neither confirmed nor denied whether it held the requested information. The Commissioner concluded that the public authority was entitled to rely on regulation 13(5A)(5)(B) as the basis for neither confirming nor denying whether it held the requested information.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13(5a)
View London Borough of Lambeth
14 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from North West Leicestershire District Council (the Council) information in relation to a compensation payment recorded in the Council’s accounts for 2016/17. The Council decided to withhold some information relying on sections 40(2) (personal information) and section 41 (information provided in confidence) of the FOIA, whilst for the remainder of the request it stated that it did not hold the requested information.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied the exemption provided by section 40(2). Following that conclusion it was not necessary to also consider the application of section 41.
The Commissioner also found that the Council incorrectly stated that it did not hold further information, resulting in a breach of section 1(1) of the FOIA. She requires the Council to provide the complainant with a fresh response regarding Question (2).
The Council must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this de
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 40
View North West Leicestershire District Council
14 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information associated with a First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights) appeal decision that resulted from a decision the Commissioner had made regarding Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health NHS Trust’s handling of a request the complainant had submitted to it. The ICO released some information, said it did not hold other information and withheld some information under section 42(1) of the FOIA (legal professional privilege). The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: At the time of the request the information that the ICO withheld under section 42(1) of the FOIA engaged this exemption and the public interest favoured maintaining the exemption. The ICO breached section 10(1) as it did not provide a response to the complainant’s request within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require the ICO to take any remedial steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0121 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 42
View Information Commissioner
14 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the Ministry of Justice a transmission log of the faxes received by the Central London County Court during three specified time periods. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Ministry of Justice does not hold the requested information. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0102 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Ministry of Justice
14 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to correspondence between councillors and a named individual. Newry, Mourne and Down District Council (the Council) disclosed the majority of the information within the scope of the request, but withheld a small amount, citing section 40(2) (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has properly applied section 40(2) in relation to the disputed information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
14 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the BBC associated with the journalist John Sweeney. The BBC considers that the requested information is not caught by the FOIA as it is held for the purposes of journalism, art or literature. The Commissioner’s decision is that this information is held by the BBC for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and does not fall within the scope of FOIA. She therefore upholds the BBC’s position and requires no remedial steps to be taken in this case.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View BBC
14 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to an Empty Homes Revolving Fund Agreement. Rossendale Borough Council refused the request under the exemption for commercial interests – section 43(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Rossendale Borough Council failed to respond in time and breached section 10(1) and that it failed to demonstrate that section 43(2) is engaged. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the withheld information to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 43
View Rossendale Borough Council
13 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information associated with a proposed land development. Trinity Hall (a College of the University of Cambridge) originally relied on section 21(1)(information accessible to applicant by other means), section 41(1) (information provided in confidence) and section 43(2) (commercial interests) of the FOIA to withhold information it considers it is likely to hold. Trinity Hall subsequently confirmed that its primary position is that it is not obliged to comply with the request under section 12(1) of the FOIA (cost exceeds the appropriate limit). It also indicated that some information would be exempt under section 42(1) (legal professional privilege). The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: The requested information, where held, can be categorised as environmental information which Trinity Hall should have handled under the EIR. Trinity Hall can rely on regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR (manifestly unreasonable request by virtue of cost) to refuse to compl
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b); EIR 9
View The University of Cambridge
13 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to an alleged assault. West Yorkshire Police neither confirmed nor denied holding any information by virtue of sections 30(3) (Investigations and proceedings), 31(3) (Law enforcement) and 40(5) (Personal information) of the FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that West Yorkshire Police has applied section 30(3) appropriately to the requested information. However, the Commissioner considers that West Yorkshire Police has breached sections 10(1) (Time for compliance) and 17(1) (Refusal of request) of the FOIA.
The Commissioner does not require West Yorkshire Police to take any steps as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0127 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 17; FOI 30
View West Yorkshire Police
13 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service (‘NICTS’) in relation to the daily lists for the Northern Ireland Court of Judicature. The NICTS refused to disclose that information, citing section 40(2) of the FOIA as a basis for non-disclosure. The Commissioner’s decision is that the NICTS has correctly applied section 40 (2) of the FOIA to the majority of the requested information. Some of the requested information consists of names of companies rather than individuals, and therefore section 40(2) would not be applicable to that information. The Commissioner requires the NICTS to disclose to the complainant the part of the requested information which consists of names of companies.
The NICTS must take this step 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 deal
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service
12 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about transactions over £25,000. The Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) says it is not obliged to comply with the request under section 12(1) of the FOIA, as it would exceed the appropriate cost and time limit to do so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust is not obliged to comply with the request under section 12(1) and is satisfied that the Trust met its obligation under section 16 to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View NORTHUMBRIA HEALTHCARE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST
12 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about how the Council ensured compliance with Part M of the Building Regulations 2010, the public sector Equality Duty, and BS8300 in the design and planning of the Odeon Cinema at Milton Keynes Stadium. The Council provided some information falling within the scope of the request but refused the remainder citing regulations 13 – third party personal data, 12(5)(e) – confidentiality of commercial information and 12(5)(a) – international relations, defence, national security or public safety. The Commissioner’s decision is that Milton Keynes Council has correctly engaged regulation 13 only for the names and contact details of junior Council staff and all third party individuals. It is not engaged for any other withheld information. The Council has correctly engaged regulation 12(5)(e) for architectural design drawings only and the public interest in maintaining the exception outweighs the public interest in disclosure. It is not engaged for
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(a); EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 13
View Milton Keynes Council
12 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding Estates Professional Service Framework RM3816. The Cabinet Office disclosed some information and provided a weblink. The complainant submitted an internal review. The Cabinet Office refused to provide other information within the scope of the request citing section 43 (prejudice to commercial interests) as its basis for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office is not entitled to rely on section 43 as its basis for withholding the information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the information it holds within the scope of the request in full. 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 o
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View Cabinet Office
12 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information with regards to elective home education. Hampshire County Council (the council) stated that this information was not held for the purposes of the FOIA under the provisions of section 3(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the information is not held by the council for its own purposes and therefore falls outside the definition held for the purposes of the FOIA under section 3(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner has found that the council breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it responded to the request outside the required 20 working days. As the council has now responded, the Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
View Hampshire County Council
12 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Scotland Office seeking copies of communications it exchanged with HM Treasury, along with notes of any meetings between the two departments, about the confidence and supply arrangement with the DUP which the government agreed in June 2017. The Scotland Office confirmed that it held information falling within the scope of the request but sought to withhold this on the basis of sections 28(1) (relations with the UK), 35(1)(a) (formulation and development of government policy) and 35(1)(b) (Ministerial communications) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that the information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of sections 35(1)(a) and 28(1) of FOIA and that in the all the circumstances of the case the public interest favours maintaining each exemption.
Exemptions cited: FOI 28; FOI 35
View Scotland Office
12 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted three requests to the Ministry of Defence (MOD) about the procurement of a particular contract. The MOD disclosed some information falling within the scope of the request but sought to withhold further information on the basis of sections 21 (information reasonably accessible to the requester), 40 (personal data), 41 (information provided in confidence), 44(1)(b) (statutory prohibition), 26(1)(b) (defence), 38 (health and safety) and 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that the information which the MOD is seeking to withhold is exempt from disclosure on the basis of sections 26(1)(b), 43(2) and 40(2) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 26; FOI 40; FOI 43
View Ministry of Defence
12 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested records of telephone or email contact regarding repair works undertaken on a specific property. The Council says it has provided all the relevant information it holds. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority does not hold any further information. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Ealing Council
12 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested all communications about child sexual abuse that have passed between Calderdale Council and a range of other public authorities during the past three years, but with the stipulation that he does not seek information relating to specific cases. The Council responded that no information was held besides that contained within individual social care files, and which would therefore fall outside the parameters of the request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold information that would fall within the specific parameters of the request. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Calderdale Council
11 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (the council) relating to named councillors use of the internal audit department and correspondence/communications between those named councillors and council staff, including the Chief Executive, concerning audit investigations. He also requested the information relating to house deals regarding one named councillor and house and land deals relating to another named councillor. The council belatedly provided some links to information in the public domain but withheld the remainder of the information under section 30(1) and (2), section 41(1) and section 40(2). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has correctly withheld the information under section 30(1)(b) and section 40(2). She also considers that no further information is held in relation to part one of the request on the balance of probability. However, the council breached section 10(1) by failing to provide links to its website within
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 30; FOI 40
View Sandwell Council
11 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted three multipart requests for information in respect of various items of information in relation to the TrawsCymru bus services. The Welsh Government refused all three requests on the grounds that they were vexatious, citing section 14(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Welsh Government was entitled to rely on section 14(1) to refuse all three requests. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0156 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Welsh Government
11 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to facial recognition technology. The Commissioner’s decision is that Surrey 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 Surrey Police to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Surrey Police
11 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a police report and other information sent to the Crown Prosecution Service in relation to the decision not to prosecute former bishop Peter Ball in 1993.The Crown Prosecution Service disclosed some information, but withheld the remainder relying on the section 30(1) FOIA (investigations and proceedings) exemption. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Crown Prosecution Service was entitled to apply section 30(1) FOIA to withhold the remaining information. The Commissioner does not require the Crown Prosecution Service to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30
View Crown Prosecution Service
11 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on specified meetings attended by representatives of the Legatum Institute (“Legatum”). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department for Exiting the European Union (‘DExEU’) has appropriately relied on section 35(1)(a) to withhold some of the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0111 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35
View Department for Exiting the European Union
11 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested minutes in respect of a notification that a specified company had applied to vary some of the conditions in the planning permission of a specified site meeting. Pembrokeshire County Council cited regulation 12(5)(b) to refuse to supply the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that Pembrokeshire County Council was entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(b) in respect of the withheld information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View Pembrokeshire County Council
11 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding psychological aptitude tests taken by prospective and current employees of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). The Commissioner’s decision is that DWP is entitled to rely on section 12(1) of the Act to refuse to comply with the request. The Commissioner finds, however, that DWP has breached section 10(1) of the Act as it failed to provide its original response with the statutory timeframe for compliance. It has also breached section 17(5) as it did not provide the complainant with its section 12 refusal notice within the statutory timeframe. The Commissioner does not require DWP to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 12; FOI 16; FOI 17
View Department for Work and Pensions
11 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding rehousing statistics following the fire at Grenfell Tower from the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (“RBKC”). RBKC disclosed some information and denied holding other information. Its position changed during the Commissioner’s investigation and it argued that while it did not hold some information, the remainder which it did hold was exempt from disclosure due to “confidentiality”. The Commissioner has deduced that it was relying on section 40 (unfair disclosure of personal data) as its basis for withholding this information. The Commissioner’s decision is that RBKC does not hold two sets of requested information. In respect of the other requested information that it does hold, it is not entitled to rely on section 40 as a basis for withholding it. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. In respect of 128 properties within the scope of the request abo
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 40
View Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea
11 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the criteria for interview shortlisting, as well as information relating to scoring for interview. The Commissioner’s decision is that Lancashire County Council has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and therefore breached Section 10(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires Lancashire County Council to issue a substantive response in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Lancashire County Council
11 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from NHS England about the NHS Capacity Tracker as referenced on HM Government website. 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 the public authority to respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View NHS England
11 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a freedom of information request to Durham University (the University) for a breakdown of income from corporate hospitality. The University provided some information and refused the remainder of 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
View University of Durham
11 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information held by Nottingham City Council (the council) relating to the proposals, consultation, costing and implementation of a parking scheme within a particular residential area. The council originally dealt with the complainant’s correspondence of 3 July 2018 as a continuum of a previous request that he had made which had already been subject to an internal review. However, following the Commissioner’s intervention the council accepted that the complainant had made a new request for information and issued a response. The Commissioner’s decision is that as the council failed to respond to the complainant’s request within 20 working days it has breached section 10(1) (time for compliance) of the FOIA. As a response has now been issued, the Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken by the council.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Nottingham City Council
11 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information in a correspondence exchange between DWP and a Trade Union. The DWP relied on sections 40(2) (third party personal data) and 41 (information provided in confidence) to withheld some of the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DWP correctly relied on sections 40 (2) and 41 to withhold requested information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40; FOI 41
View Department for Work and Pensions
9 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant submitted a request to the Northern Ireland Environment Agency, an executive agency of Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA), seeking a copy of a file covering pollution at his trout hatchery business. The DAERA sought to withhold the information falling within the scope of the request on the basis of regulation 12(5)(b) (course of justice) of the EIR. The Commissioner has concluded that the withheld information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of regulation 12(5)(b) and that in all the circumstances of the case the public interest favours maintaining the exception. However, the Commissioner has concluded that the DAERA breached regulation 11(4) of the EIR by failing to complete the internal review within 40 working days. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0155 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11; EIR 12(5)(b)
View Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (Northern Ireland)
8 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to vehicles licensed, or formerly licensed, as hackney carriage licences or Private Hire Vehicles (PHV’s). The council provided the requested information other than the vehicle recognition marks/licence plate numbers (VRM’s). It withheld these on the basis that section 40(2) (personal data) applied. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to apply section 40(2) to the information. The Commissioner has also decided that other information is exempt from disclosure under section 31(1)(a) (prevention and detection of crime). The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0083 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(1)(a); FOI 40(2)
View Tandridge District Council
8 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to vehicles licensed, or formerly licensed, as hackney carriage licences or Private Hire Vehicles (PHV’s). The council provided the requested information other than the vehicle recognition marks/licence plate numbers (VRM’s). It withheld these on the basis that section 40(2) (personal data) and section 31(1)(a) (prevention and detection of crime) applied. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to apply section 40(2) to the information. She has also decided that the council was correct to apply section 31(1)(a) to the information. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(1); FOI 40(2)
View Sunderland City Council
7 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from NHS South Worcestershire Clinical Commissioning Group (the CCG) email addresses held of its member GP practices. The Commissioner’s decision is that the CCG failed to provide the complainant with a copy of the requested information within the required timeframe and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. As the CCG has now disclosed the information to the complainant, the Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
7 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested from Middlesbrough Council (the Council) information relating to the planning application about a specific property in Middlesbrough. The Council disclosed some information and withheld other information under the EIR - regulations 12(4)(e) (internal communications) and 12(5)(f) (interests of information provider).The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to respond within the statutory time limits and breached regulation 5(2). She has concluded that the exception at regulation 12(4)(e) is engaged. However, the balance of the public interest favours disclosure of the information. The Commissioner also finds the Council’s reliance of regulation 12(5)(f) was incorrectly applied. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Subject to paragraph 45 of this notice, disclose the requested information to the complainant.
The Council must take this step within 35 calendar days of the
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e); EIR 12(5)(f); EIR 5(2)
View Middlesbrough Council
7 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to surface water drainage matters. The Council denied holding relevant information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold the requested information. She therefore upholds the Council’s application of regulation 12(4)(a) (information not held) of the EIR. She did, however, find a procedural breach of regulation 14 (refusal to disclose information) of the EIR. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 14
View Staffordshire County Council
7 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding projects commissioned under the Consultancy One framework. The Cabinet Office has asserted that the requested information is not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Cabinet Office does hold the requested information and has failed to fully consider and responds to the request in accordance with section 1(1) of the Act. The Commissioner requires the public authority to issue a fresh response to the request that does not deny that the information is held (ie the Cabinet Office need to comply with section 1(1)(a) by confirming that the information is held) and then either disclose the information as described in the confidential annex, or issue a refusal notice citing a reason to withhold the information. 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 fa
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Cabinet Office
7 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on the guidance that was available to general practitioners in 2009 and which related to working with service users who had suffered sexual abuse in 2009. The Department of Health & Social Care (DHSC) originally refused the request under section 21 of the FOIA on the basis that the information was already available to the public and provided links to where the information was available on the internet. The complainant was not satisfied that the DHSC had properly considered all the information that was likely to be held. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the DHSC changed its position and refused the request under section 12 on the basis that the cost of compliance would exceed the appropriate limit. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DHSC is entitled to rely on section 12 to refuse to confirm whether it holds any information relevant to the request. However it has failed to comply with section 17(5) in that it did no
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16; FOI 17
View Department of Health and Social Care
7 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Dorset County Council (the Council) information regarding a report which concerns the Partnership for Older People Programme (POPP). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly withheld the information to the request under section 41(1) (information provided in confidence) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that as the information had been supplied by an internal colleague within the Council, the exemptions is not engaged. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the requested information – the original report. 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 41
View Dorset County Council
7 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about a press statement issued by the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) about a high profile prisoner. The MOJ disclosed some information but withheld information about the staff involved in preparing and authorising the press statement, on the grounds that it was exempt from disclosure under section 40 (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOJ was entitled to apply section 40 to withhold the names of the members of staff who prepared and authorised the statement, but that section 40 was not engaged in respect of the job titles of senior staff who authorised the issue of the statement. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose to the complainant the job titles of the senior staff who authorised the issue of the press statement. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0132 under appeal. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0144 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Ministry of Justice
7 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Gambling Commission (the Commission) relating to the number of EuroMillions lottery tickets issued missing Millionaire Maker codes (the codes). The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Commission does not hold information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require theCommission to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Gambling Commission
6 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about waiting times for music lessons. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough of Enfield does not hold any further information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Enfield Council
6 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested Coventry University (the university) to disclose expenses information for members of the leadership team between 2012 and 2017. The university refused to comply with the request citing section 12 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the university is entitled to rely on section 12 of the FOIA. However, the Commissioner has found the university in breach of section 10 and 16 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the university to provide appropriate advice and assistance to the complainant as far as it would be reasonable to do so in accordance with its obligations under section 16 of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 12; FOI 16
View Coventry University
6 Mar 2019Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to mental health homicides. NHS England failed to respond to this request within the statutory time for compliance. The Commissioner considers that NHS England has breached section 10(1) FOIA in the handling of this request. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View NHS England
6 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a report that he believes was provided to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) between 1998 and 2000. The FCO says it does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0078 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
6 Mar 2019Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information regarding the redevelopment of Basingstoke Leisure Park. The Commissioner’s decision is that Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council correctly relied upon regulations 12(5)(b) and 12(5)(e) to withhold some of the requested information. The Commissioner finds that the council have breached regulation 5 of the EIR in relation to one item of information however she finds, on the balance of probabilities, that it does not hold any further recorded information in scope of the request. The council changed its response at the internal review stage and in response to the Commissioner’s investigations, therefore the Commissioner finds that the council failed to issue an adequate refusal notice and thus breached Regulation 14 of the EIR. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the stage 1 evaluation matrices.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 14(2)(1); EIR 5(1)
View Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council
6 Mar 2019Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Peterborough City Council (the Council) correspondence between the Council and Fenland District Council (FDC) relating to a conduct complaint against a named councillor and the internal correspondence on the same matter.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on the exemption at section 42(1) (legal professional privilege) of the FOIA to withhold the information.
Therefore, the Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 42
View Peterborough City Council