14 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Warwickshire County Council (the Council) information relating to the new Kenilworth Railway Station. The Council refused the request under the exemption provided by section 43(2) (commercial interests) of the FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly cited section 43(2) of the FOIA and the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. Therefore, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43(2)
View Warwickshire County Council
14 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested declaration of interest and interest register forms in relation to various individuals at NHS NEL Commissioning Support Unit. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS England has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires NHS England to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1)
View NHS England
14 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Care Quality Commission (CQC) about minutes of meetings from the CQC Expert by Experience Programme Board. The Commissioner’s decision is that the CQC 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 CQC to respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View CQC
14 Dec 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to a policy requiring all applicants to provide medical information from their general practitioners for the grant of new and renewal of shotgun certificates. The complainant also requested information about gun related suicides
The Commissioner’s decision is that Lincolnshire Police is not obliged to comply with the request under section 12(1). However, she finds Lincolnshire Police breached section 16 of the FOIA by failing to provide advice and assistance to the complainant. The Commissioner requires the public authority provide advice and assistance to the complainant to assist them in refining their request where it is possible to do so. The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Lincolnshire Police
13 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating the completed application and supporting documents of a Senior Circuit Judge. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) was entitled to rely on section 44 of the FOIA (prohibitions on disclosure) to withhold the information requested. The Commissioner does not require the JAC to take any steps as a result of this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 44(1)(a)
View Judicial Appointments Commission
13 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the application for, and approval of funding for, a medical trial of treatments for chronic fatigue syndrome known as the PACE trial. The public authority provided some information and further information was disclosed during the course of the Commissioner’s investigation. The outstanding issue addressed in this notice is complainant’s right of access to the names of external reviewers who reviewed the research proposal. These names were withheld under section 40(2) – third party personal data, section 41 – information provided in confidence and section 36(2)(c) – prejudice to the conduct of public affairs. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MRC is entitled to rely on sections 40(2) and 36(2)(b)(ii) to withhold the requested names. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any further action in this matter.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36; FOI 40(2)
View UK Research and Innovation
13 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on the name of a subsidiary company of Capita plc. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough of Barnet (‘the Council’) does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1)(b)
View Barnet Council
13 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information in relation to the London Borough of Lambeth Council’s (the Council) preparation for GDPR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has breached section 10(1) of the Act by not complying with section 1(1). The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide a response, in accordance with the Act, to the requests relating to a) GDPR readiness and b) security incidents. 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; FOI 10
View London Borough of Lambeth
13 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about internal complaints made by BBC staff against the Victoria Derbyshire programme. The BBC explained the information was covered by the derogation and excluded from FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that this information was held by the BBC for the purposes of ‘journalism, art or literature’ and did not fall inside FOIA. She therefore upholds the BBC’s position and requires no remedial steps to be taken in this case. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0296 Appeal Dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View BBC
13 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Youth Justice Agency (“YJA”) regarding a contract for the provision of communication services and also regarding active grievances within JJC (Juvenile Justice Centres). The YJA disclosed some information to the complainant in relation to the contract, however it withheld some information, citing section 43(2) of the FOIA as a basis for non-disclosure. In relation to the active grievances, the YJA disclosed information to the complainant, however the complainant believed that this was not the full extent of the information held by the YJA within the scope of her request, therefore she believed it had breached section 1 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the YJA has correctly applied section 43(2) of the FOIA to the withheld information in respect of the contract. The Commissioner has also decided that, on the balance of probabilities, the YJA held no further information relating to active grievances at the time of the
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 43
13 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested from Breckland Council information in relation to a planning application consisting of all and any correspondence between the applicant and the Council. The Council responded to the complainant stating that it did not hold information within the scope of the request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has breached Regulation 5(1) of the EIR by stating incorrectly that it did not hold information falling within the scope of the complainant’s request. It is now required to issue a fresh response to the request.
The Commissioner requires the Council to respond to the complainant with a fresh response to his information request. This response must set out accurately whether the Council holds information falling within the scope of the request and either disclose any such information, or explain why the EIR does not require such a disclosure.
The Council must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1)
View Breckland Council
12 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a breakdown of the types of responses to a consultation. The Commissioner’s decision is that Homes for Haringey has failed to issue a response which complies with the FOIA and has therefore breached Section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires Homes for Haringey to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a substantive response, under the FOIA, to element [2] of the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
12 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding the issuing of Section 146 Notices. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was valid but that it had more than one objective reading. The London Borough of Southwark was required to clarify the information that was being requested but failed to do so adequately. It therefore breached its obligations under Section 16 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the London Borough to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a fresh response, under the FOIA, to the request using the interpretation laid out at paragraph 14 of this Notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 16
View Southwark Council
12 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of correspondence with, or about, local community group Sussex Friends of Israel. The Commissioner’s decision is that Sussex 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 Sussex Police to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Sussex Police
12 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested from Elton Parish Council (“the Council”) information regarding a petition to expand the dog park into the area designated for the Jubilee Field community woodland project. The Commissioner’s decision is that 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). The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a substantive response, under the EIR, to the request.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
11 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made a request for information relating to the total number of operations cancelled for non-clinical reasons. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust has failed to respond to the complainant’s request within 20 working days of receipt and has therefore breached section 10(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Trust to provide the complainant with a response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
11 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
In two requests, the complainant has requested guidance from the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). FOS refused to comply with the requests which it has categorised as vexatious under section 14(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: FOS is entitled to rely on sections 14(1) to refuse to comply with the complainant’s two requests. The Commissioner does not require FOS to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
11 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant sent three emails to the Ministry of Defence (MOD) on the same day which in total contained 24 separate information requests concerning post-traumatic stress disorder and associated issues. The MOD considered the requests to be vexatious and therefore relied on section 14(1) of FOIA not to answer them. Furthermore, in light of its previous communications with the complainant it did not provide him with a refusal notice stating this fact but instead relied on the provision contained at section 17(6) of FOIA not to do so. The Commissioner has concluded that the requests are vexatious and furthermore that the MOD was entitled to rely on section 17(6) of FOIA not to provide the complainant with a refusal notice stating this.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14; FOI 17
View Ministry of Defence
11 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the organisational structure of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) between April 2017 and August 2017. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the PHSO does hold information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner requires the PHSO to disclose all charts dated March 2017 that have been identified on its intranet showing its various departmental structures.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
11 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
In two requests, the complainant has requested guidance from the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). FOS refused to comply with the requests which it has categorised as vexatious under section 14(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: FOS is entitled to rely on sections 14(1) to refuse to comply with the complainant’s two requests. The Commissioner does not require FOS to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
11 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Cabinet Office seeking a copy of the ‘Facebook Insights files’ for the Prime Minister’s official Facebook page for a three month period. The Cabinet Office responded and argued that the requested information was exempt from disclosure on the basis of sections 35(1)(a) (formulation and development of government policy) and 35(1)(b) (Ministerial communications) of FOIA. It subsequently dropped its reliance on these exemptions and sought instead to withhold the information on the basis of section 36(2)(c) (effective conduct of public affairs) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that the requested information is not exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 36(2)(c) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View Cabinet Office
11 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested from Middlesbrough Council information consisting of emails sent to and from a specific Council officer in relation to Middlesbrough Bus Station. The Council disclosed some information and decided to withhold the remainder. The complainant, however, is unhappy that the Council did not provide the information within the time period stipulated in Regulation 5(2) of the
EIR (20 working days).
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to respond to the complainant’s request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Regulation 5(2) of the EIR.
Since the request has now been responded to, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further step in relation to this complaint.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Middlesbrough Council
11 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a list of council strategies. The council applied section 14(2) on the basis that it had previously received and responded to very similar requests from the complainant encompassing the same information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was not correct to apply section 14(2) to the information. It had previously agreed to provide information to the complainant in response to her earlier request but had failed to do so. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. To disclose the information offered to the complainant by the council on 30 May 2017.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(2)
View York City Council
11 Dec 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of specific emails sent in 2012. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is relying on section 12(2) of the Act to refuse to comply with the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that DWP is entitled to refuse to comply with the request, and the duty to confirm or deny whether information is held, on the basis on section 12(2) of the Act. The Commissioner considers that DWP has breached section 16 of the Act by failing to provide adequate advice and assistance to aid the complainant in refining his request. The Commissioner does not, however, require DWP to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Department for Work and Pensions
11 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made a request for information relating to applicant households accommodated by Taunton Deane Borough Council (the Council) in bed and breakfast hotels, or other nightly paid, privately managed accommodation with shared facilities. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has failed to respond to the complainant’s request within 20 working days of receipt and has therefore breached section 10(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Council to provide the complainant with a response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council
11 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made a request for information relating to the total number of operations cancelled for non-clinical reasons. The Commissioner’s decision is that North Middlesex University NHS Trust (the Trust) has failed to respond to the complainant’s request within 20 working days of receipt and has therefore breached section 10(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Trust to provide the complainant with a response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust
11 Dec 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information considered at a council meeting regarding the disposal of a piece of council-owned land for development. Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (SMBC) disclosed most of the information falling within scope of the request, apart from a small amount of financial information, which it said was exempt from disclosure under regulation 12(5)(e) (commercial confidentiality) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that SMBC was entitled to rely on the exception at regulation 12(5)(e) to withhold the information. However, she found that SMBC breached regulation 5(2) (time for compliance) as it failed to respond to the complainant’s request for information within 20 working days.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 5(2)
View Solihull Council
10 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested from Norfolk County Council (the Council) information regarding incomplete CIPP streets under the current Street Lighting Private Finance Initiative (PFI) Contract. The Commissioner’s decision is that the information relates to material still in the course of completion. The regulation 12(4)(d) exception is engaged and the public interest favours withholding the information.
A short confidential annex has been produced which contains the Council’s further supporting evidence. This will be provided exclusively to the Council. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d)
View Norfolk County Council
10 Dec 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a freedom of information request to Addenbrooke's Hospital, part of the Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) for information about car park income. The Trust provided some information but withheld the ground rental income for 2 car parks under the section 43(2) (commercial interests) exemption. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust has incorrectly applied Section 43(2) of the FOIA to the withheld information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the ground rental income for the 2 car parks from 2014/2015, 2015/2016 and 2016/2017.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
10 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about misconduct cases. The Metropolitan Police Service withheld the information, citing sections 30(1)(a) (Investigations and proceedings) and 40(2) (Third party personal information) of the FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Metropolitan Police Service has applied section 40(2) of the FOIA appropriately.
The Commissioner does not require the Metropolitan Police Service to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Metropolitan Police Service
10 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the DVA relating to Approved Driving Instructors having been removed from the register of Approved Driving Instructors for criminal convictions. The DVA disclosed some of the requested information to the complainant, however it refused to disclose the remainder, citing section 40(2) of the FOIA as a basis for non-disclosure. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DVA has correctly applied the above exemption to the information not disclosed to the complainant. Therefore, the Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency
10 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust (‘NWAS’) on particular payments, NWAS’s policy on gifts and particular dates and times. NWAS said it did not hold some information, confirmed that it had made one payment and confirmed that it had previously provided the complainant with its policy on gifts. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: NWAS does not hold any further information that falls within the scope of request 1 and has complied with section 1(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require NWAS to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust
7 Dec 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has submitted two requests for recorded information from Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council. The information the complainant seeks relates to a police investigation of a complaint about a dummy CCTV camera at a specified address. Having first refused the complainant’s requests in reliance on section 14(1) of the FOIA, on review, the Council determined that the requested information was subject to an application of sections 31(1), 40(2) and 41(1). The Commissioner’s decision is that Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council is not entitled to rely on section 31(1)(a) in respect of the complainant’s first request. She does however find that the Council is entitled to rely on section 40(2) to withhold that information. In respect of the complainant’s second request, the Commissioner has decided that the Council is entitled to rely on section 40(2) in respect of the second and third elements of that request, and on section 41 to withhold an email which is the subject of the fourt
Exemptions cited: FOI 31; FOI 40(2); FOI 41
View Wigan Council
7 Dec 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested various items of information in respect of the routing of the T3 TrawsCymru bus service in Wales. The Welsh Government initially provided some limited information, withheld a small amount under section 40(2) and did not respond to all items of the request as it considered some were not valid requests for information under the FOIA. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the Welsh Government provided an amended response to the complainant and cited section 21 in respect of some of the information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Welsh Government was entitled to rely on section 40(2) in respect of the withheld information and section 21 in respect of information accessible to the applicant by other means. However, the Welsh Government’s failure to respond to all items of the request, and within the appropriate timescale represents a breach of sections 1(1) and 10(1) of the FOIA. Information Tribunal
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 21; FOI 40(2)
View Welsh Government
7 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Kirby Muxloe Parish Council in relation to a councillors’ audit report.
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 respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the FOIA.
The Council 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 dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
7 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information, via the whatdotheyknow.com (“WDTK”) website, relating to an email he had previously sent. The Commissioner’s decision is that all the information that has been requested is the complainant’s own personal data. She therefore finds that Reading Borough Council was not obliged to supply any information under the FOIA as any information which the Council held within the scope of the request would attract the absolute exemption at Section 40(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2019/0002 struck out.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(1)
View Reading Borough Council
7 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
Summary wording for website: The complainant has requested information about the Safeguarding Investigation Unit. The Commissioner’s decision is that Sussex 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 Sussex Police to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Sussex Police
7 Dec 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Bassetlaw District Council information regarding the intention of British Telecom (BT) to remove a number of payphone booths from villages within the Bassetlaw area. The Council provided the complainant with copies of two letters sent to the Council by BT. However, the complainant was of the opinion that the Council should be in possession of further information relevant to his request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council has provided the complainant with all of the information which it holds falling within the scope of the request. However, it did not issue a response within 20 working days and therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Bassetlaw District Council
6 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the proportion of the budget for the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) awareness advertising campaign that went towards paying for the right to use a named celebrity’s image in that campaign. The FCA applied sections 40(2) (third party personal data) and 43(2) (commercial interests) of the FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FCA was entitled to rely on section 43(2) of the FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View Financial Conduct Authority
6 Dec 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about research projects funded by named organisations in the Department of Aerospace Engineering (AERO) at the University of Bristol (the university) from1 January 2015 to the date of his request on 6 November 2017. The Commissioner’s decision is that the university is entitled to rely on section 12(1). However, she considers that the university has not complied with its obligations under section 16 of the FOIA to provide the complainant with reasonable advice and assistance. She also notes that the response to the request was provided outside the statutory 20 working day time limit and accordingly the university has breached section 10 of the FOIA. The
Commissioner requires the university to ensure compliance with the legislation and provide advice and assistance to enable the complainant to submit a refined request within the appropriate cost limit. The university must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 12; FOI 16
View The University of Bristol
5 Dec 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding the Department for Work and Pensions’ expenditure defending its employees in legal actions. DWP initially informed the complainant that it did not hold the requested information, however, it subsequently amended its position and relied on section 12 of the Act as identifying and collating the information would exceed the appropriate limit. 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 considers that DWP has breached section 10(1) as it did not confirm that it held information within the statutory time frame. It has also breached section 17(5) as it did not provide the complainant with its refusal notice within the statutory timeframe. The Commissioner does not require DWP to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 12; FOI 17
View Department for Work and Pensions
5 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) seeking communications between the FCO in London and the British embassy in Washington concerning General Michael Flynn. The FCO provided the complainant with some information falling within the scope of his request but sought to withhold further information on the basis of sections 27(1)(a), (c) and (d) (international relations); 31(1)(c) (law enforcement) and 40(2) (personal data) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that withheld information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of sections 27(1)(a), (b) and (d) and that in all the circumstances of the case the public interest favours maintaining the exemptions. The Commissioner has also concluded that the FCO has correctly applied section 40(2) to some of the withheld information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 27; FOI 40
4 Dec 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested legal advice relating to a planning application. York City Council refused the request, citing the exception for the course of justice – regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that City of York Council has failed to carry out an internal review and breached regulation 11(4) but that it correctly applied regulation 12(5)(b) to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(5)(b)
View York City Council
4 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested correspondence between Lancashire County Council (the Council) and IKEA regarding a strategic development site. 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
View Lancashire County Council
4 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) seeking communications between Mo Farah and his training team about performance enhancing drug use. UKAD refused to confirm or deny whether it held information falling within the scope of this request on the basis of sections 31(3) (law enforcement) and 36(3) (effective conduct of public affairs) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that section 31(3) is engaged and that in all the circumstances of the case the public interest favours maintaining the exemption.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View UK Anti-Doping
4 Dec 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to a number of University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust (previously known as Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust) (the Trust) reports from 2017. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust is entitled to rely section 14(1) of the FOIA in response to the request. However, the Commissioner also finds that the Trust breached section 10 (time for compliance) of the FOIA by not providing the information requested at part 2, within 20 working days. As the information has now been provided the Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust
3 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the number of cancelled operations. Barts Health NHS 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 Barts Health NHS Trust
3 Dec 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of the legal advice the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) obtained which caused or contributed to some guidance that was published on 2 December 2016. The FCA refused to disclose this information, citing section 42 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FCA has acted appropriately by refusing to disclose the withheld information under section 42 of the FOIA. She has however found the FCA in breach of section 10 of the FOIA, as it failed to respond to the complainant’s request within 20 working days of receipt. The Commissioner does not require any further action to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 42
View Financial Conduct Authority
3 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested statistics relating to the number of information requests received, and responded to, by the public authority in 2017/18.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames (“the Royal Borough”) failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA.
The Commissioner requires the Royal Borough to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation;
Issue a substantive response, under the FOIA, to the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Kingston upon Thames Council
3 Dec 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the number of transgender patients treated by a particular professor since 2009. The trust responded to the first element of the request, although this was late and incomplete. To the date of this notice the trust has not responded to the second element. The Commissioner’s decision is that trust has breached section 10 of the FOIA in this case. She therefore requires the trust to respond to the second element of the request in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust