22 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested details of the accommodation booking for officers deployed during President Trump’s visit. The Commissioner’s decision is that Essex 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 Essex Police to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Essex Police
22 Oct 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to a charity. West Yorkshire Police did not comply with the request, citing section 12 (cost limits) of the FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that West Yorkshire Police has applied section 12 of the FOIA appropriately and therefore does not have to comply with the request. The Commissioner also considers that West Yorkshire Police has complied with section 16 (duty to provide advice and assistance) of the FOIA. However, the Commissioner considers that West Yorkshire Police has breached section 10(1) (time for compliance) of the FOIA.
The Commissioner does not require West Yorkshire Police to take any steps as a result of this decision notice. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0230 withdrawn.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 12; FOI 16
View West Yorkshire Police
22 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request for information to Tunbridge Wells Borough Council. Tunbridge Wells Borough Council initially responded within the 20 working day time limit under the FOIA, but did not provide all of the requested information. During the Commissioner’s investigation, it provided additional information.
The Commissioner’s decision is that Tunbridge Wells Borough Council has breached section 10 (time for compliance) of the FOIA.
The Commissioner does not require West Yorkshire Police to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Tunbridge Wells Borough Council
19 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested a copy of legal advice which the council holds relating to Warwick Racecourse. The council provided a redacted copy of the advice to the complainant however the majority of the advice was redacted on the basis that the exception in Regulation 12(5)(b) applied. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to apply Regulation 12(5)(b) to the advice. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View Warwick District Council
19 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to inspections and assessments of veterinary premises. The Commissioner’s decision is that Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) has not applied section 31 correctly. The Commissioner requires VMD to provide the complainant with a copy of the inspection report for the closed practice. VMD 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 31
View Veterinary Medicines Directorate
19 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the questions set for the driving theory test. The Commissioner’s decision is that Driving and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) has correctly cited section 14(1) of the FOIA in response to the request. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0254 struck out.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency
19 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested the GMC registration number of a doctor within NHS NENE Clinical Commissioning Group (the CCG). The Commissioner’s decision is that the CGG failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and therefore breached Section 1 and 10 of the FOIA. As a response has now been issued, the Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
18 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to rough sleeping European Economic Area (EEA) nationals. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office 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 Home Office to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
18 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information regarding incentives offered to Home Office staff with regard to immigration control. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office 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 Home Office to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
18 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to EU citizens who, he believes, may struggle to apply for settled status in the run up to Brexit. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office 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 Home Office to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
18 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information regarding the Windrush generation. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office 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 Home Office to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
18 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about persons scheduled to be on a particular charter flight. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office 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 Home Office to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
18 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about a cancelled procurement process. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office has failed to complete its deliberations on the balance of the public interest within a reasonable time period and has therefore breached Section 17(3) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Cabinet Office to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a substantive response, under the FOIA, to the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17
View Cabinet Office
17 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information regarding the Council’s internal structure and regarding repair work. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Regulation 5(2) of the EIR. The Commissioner requires the Royal Borough to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a substantive response, under the EIR, to the request.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea
17 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested patient level data associated with the PACE trial. The position of King’s College London (KCL) is that it does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: Under section 1(1)(a) of the FOIA KCL cannot be said to hold the information the complainant has requested. The Commissioner does not require KCL to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View King's College London
17 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to traffic monitoring data near Little Langdale. The Lake District National Park Authority (LDNPA) cited section 22 (intended for future publication) of FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request should have been handled under the EIR. LDNPA reconsidered the request under the EIR and confirmed it considered the withheld information to be exempt under regulation 12(4)(d) - material still in the course of completion. The Commissioner’s decision is that regulation 12(4)(d) is engaged but, in the specific circumstances of this case, the public interest in disclosure of the requested information outweighs the public interest in maintaining the exception. The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide the complainant with the requested 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 mak
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d)
View Lake District National Park Authority
17 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Newcastle City Council information in relation to penalty charge notices (PCNs) issued for vehicles in John Dobson Street. The Council provided the complainant with some information. For the remainder the Council applied section 12(1) of the FOIA on the basis that it had estimated that responding to the request would exceed the appropriate cost limit. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was correct to apply section 12(1) of the FOIA and that it was not therefore obliged to comply with the remainder of the request. The Commissioner also considers that the Council provided the complainant with appropriate advice and assistance in accordance with its obligations under section 16 FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Newcastle City Council
16 Oct 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a request for an Office of Judicial Complaints (‘OJC’) investigation statement in relation to a named Judge. The Ministry of Justice (the ‘MOJ’) would neither confirm nor deny (‘NCND’) whether it held the requested information, citing the NCND provisions in sections 44(2) – prohibitions on disclosure - and 40(5) – personal information - of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOJ has correctly applied section 44 on the basis that disclosure of the information requested was prohibited by section 139 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. As she has found this exemption to be engaged, she has not found it necessary to consider the MOJ’s reliance on section 40(5). However, as the MOJ failed to issue its’ refusal notice within the requisite 20 working days’ time limit, it has breached section 17(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the MOJ to take any steps as a result of this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 44
View Ministry of Justice
16 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information transferred to the Public Records Office of Northern Ireland (PRONI), part of the Department for Communities. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FOIA does not provide for a public authority to deal with requests for transferred public records in the absence of the appropriate Northern Ireland Minister. This means that the public authority cannot issue a valid response to the request in this case. Therefore, although the Commissioner finds that the public authority has not responded in compliance with the FOIA, she cannot require the public authority to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 15
16 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information transferred to the Public Records Office of Northern Ireland (PRONI), part of the Department for Communities. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FOIA does not provide for a public authority to deal with requests for transferred public records in the absence of the appropriate Northern Ireland Minister. This means that the public authority cannot issue a valid response to the request in this case. Therefore, although the Commissioner finds that the public authority has not responded in compliance with the FOIA, she cannot require the public authority to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 15
16 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested all information Ofsted holds in relation to a particular school in Surrey between specified dates. The complainant asked for this to include (but not be limited by) all emails sent or received, all complaints and all child safety issues raised. Initially Ofsted refused to confirm or deny whether it holds the requested information under section 31(3) of the FOIA. However, at the internal review stage it changed its stance, disclosed some information and withheld other information under section 40 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Ofsted is entitled to withhold the remaining withheld information under section 40 of the FOIA. No steps are therefore required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills
16 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information transferred to the Public Records Office of Northern Ireland (PRONI), part of the Department for Communities. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FOIA does not provide for a public authority to deal with requests for transferred public records in the absence of the appropriate Northern Ireland Minister. This means that the public authority cannot issue a valid response to the request in this case. Therefore, although the Commissioner finds that the public authority has not responded in compliance with the FOIA, she cannot require the public authority to take any remedial steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 15
16 Oct 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to a proposed Garden Village near Buckover. West of England Combined Authority initially handled the request under the FOIA, disclosing some information and withholding some information under exemptions. During the Commissioner’s investigation the public authority reconsidered the request under the EIR, disclosing some information and withholding other information under the exceptions for material in the course of completion (regulation 12(4)(d)) and internal communications (regulation 12(4)(e)). The Commissioner’s decision is that the West of England Combined Authority breached regulation 5(1) and regulation 14 of the EIR and that it correctly withheld information under regulation 12(4)(d) and regulation 12(4)(e).
The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 12(4)(e); EIR 14; EIR 5(1)
View West of England Combined Authority
16 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the patient access schemes/ commercial access agreements for two specified drugs. NHS England withheld the requested information under section 43(2) FOIA. The Commissioner considers that NHS England has correctly applied section 43(2) FOIA to the withheld information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View NHS England
15 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Cabinet Office for copies of correspondence between the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, and The Duke of Edinburgh about the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. The Cabinet Office refused to confirm or deny whether it held any information falling within the scope of the request on the basis of the exemption contained at section 37(2) of FOIA, by virtue of section 37(1)(ac) which provides that information is exempt from disclosure if it relates to communications with, or on behalf of, a member of the Royal Family. It also sought to rely on section 40(5) (personal data) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that section 37(2) is engaged and that in all the circumstances of the case the public interest favours maintaining the exemption.
Exemptions cited: FOI 37
View Cabinet Office
15 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to Homes of Haringey (HfH) for a copy of a report compiled by the audit and accountancy firm Mazars into the performance of Move 51, a commercial lettings agency which was a subsidiary of HfH. HfH provided the complainant with a copy of the report but redacted certain parts of it on the basis of section 40(2) (personal data) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that the majority of redacted information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 40(2), although a small portion of this information is not. The Council must disclose this latter information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
15 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Cabinet Office for a copy of the minutes of, and any associated papers for, the Domestic Affairs Cabinet committee in January 2003 which considered tuition fees. The Cabinet Office withheld the information in the scope of the request on the basis of sections 35(1)(a) (formulation and development of government policy) and 35(1)(b) (Ministerial communications) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that the withheld information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 35(1)(b) of FOIA and that in the circumstances of the case the public interest favours maintaining the exemption.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35
View Cabinet Office
15 Oct 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the Crown Prosecution Service’s (CPS) decision to prosecute in a specific case of suspected female genital mutilation (FGM). The CPS said it did not hold some of the information described in the request. With regard to the information it did hold, it said it was exempt from disclosure under sections 30 (investigations and proceedings), 36 (effective conduct of public affairs), 40 (personal information) and 42 (legal professional privilege) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the CPS was entitled to rely on sections 30(1)(c) and 36(2)(b)(ii) of the FOIA to withhold the majority of the information. However, she found that it breached sections 1 and 10 of the FOIA with regard to information it subsequently found that it did hold in respect of the second part of the request. The Commissioner requires the CPS to issue a fresh response to question 2. The information should either be disclosed (with appropriate redactions for person
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 30; FOI 36
View Crown Prosecution Service
12 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the name and job title of the most senior member of staff present at the meeting where the decision was made to appoint a temporary operator at the St Leonards on Sea Post Office. The Commissioner’s decision is that Post Office Limited (Post Office) has incorrectly applied section 40(2) of the FOIA to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose to the complainant the name and job title of the most senior member of staff present at the meeting.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Post Office Ltd
12 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has asked the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (“the MHCLG”) to provide him with recorded information concerning the voter identification pilot scheme for the elections of May 2018, and specifically for information which concerns the exclusion of Tower Hamlets from the Government’s pilot. Having first refused the complainant’s request in reliance on section 31(1) of the FOIA, and following the Commissioner’s initial enquiry in this matter, the MHCLG disclosed to the complainant much of the information it holds which is relevant to his request. One document, a briefing note for an intended telephone conversation between Ministers, was identified which the MHCLG determined should continue to be withheld in reliance on section 35(1)(b). The Commissioner has decided that the MHCLG has correctly applied the exemption provided by section 35(1)(b) and it is therefore entitled to withhold the briefing note.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35
View Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
12 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the clients of Civicance Ltd, a company wholly owned by Cheshire East Council. The Council refused to supply the information citing section 43(2) of the FOIA – release of the information would be prejudicial to the Council’s and Civicance Ltd’s commercial interests. The Commissioner’s decision is that Cheshire East Council is entitled to rely of section 43(2) to withhold the information, and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View Cheshire East Council
12 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information associated with the Teachers’ Additional Voluntary Contributions (AVC) scheme and a particular contract the Department for Education (DfE/’the department’) has with Prudential. DfE has categorised the requests as vexatious under section 14(1) of the FOIA, and as repeat requests under section 14(2). The Commissioner’s decision is that the complainant’s requests are vexatious under section 14(1) of the FOIA and DfE is not obliged to comply with them. The Commissioner does not require DfE to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0245 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View Department for Education
11 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
In two requests, the complainant has requested information concerning NHS Continuing Healthcare. South Warwickshire Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) categorised both requests as vexatious under section 14(1) of the FOIA. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the CCG withdrew its reliance on section 14(1) in respect of request 2. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: Request 1 of 2 January 2018 cannot be categorised as vexatious under section 14(1) of the FOIA and the CCG is obliged to comply with it. The CCG breached section 10(1) with regard to request 2 of 2 January 2018 as it has not released the requested information to the complainant within 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the CCG to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Issue the complainant with a response to request 1 that does not rely on section 14(1). If it has not already done so, release to the complainant the information he requested in request 2.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 14
View South Lincolnshire Clinical Commissioning Group
11 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information in relation to a named building. Cambridgeshire County Council (the council) responded that it did not hold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Cambridgeshire County Council
11 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding the floor of a particular apartment. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough of Haringey (‘the Council’) has appropriately withheld the information in reliance of the exemption at section 40(5) FOIA – Personal information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take the any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Haringey Council
11 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about selection tests. The Consortium of Selective Schools in Essex (CSSE) released aggregated data but has refused to release the specific information the complainant has requested. It considers that to do so would release the personal data of third persons and that therefore the requested information is exempt information under section 40(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is follows: The requested information is not personal data and does not engage the section 40(2) exemption. CSSE breached section 17(1) as it did not issue the complainant with an adequate refusal notice. The Commissioner requires CSSE to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Release to the complainant the information he has requested.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 40
11 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Warwick Town Council (the Council) information relating to Warwick in Bloom 2018. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly cited section 43(2) (commercial interests) of the FOIA as 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
11 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested all information held by the DVLA on a specific named individual. The DVLA refused to confirm or deny if information was held by virtue of section 41(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DVLA has correctly applied the exclusion from the duty to confirm or deny if information is held at section 41(2) of the FOIA and that the inherent public interest favours protecting the confidence. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41
View Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
10 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made requests for information concerning the number of domestic abuse victims and the number of domestic violence disclosure requests. The Commissioner’s decision is that City of London Police (COLP) has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to either request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires COLP to issue responses to the requests in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View City of London Police
10 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information held by Brighton & Hove City Council concerning any actions and decisions it has taken to ensure that the FOIA legislation is implemented correctly, and information held by the Council which concerns the number of investigations conducted by the ICO into its handling of requests for information compared with similar authorities. The Commissioner has decided that Brighton & Hove City Council has complied with the provisions of section 1 of the FOIA on the grounds that, at the time the Council received the complainant’s request, it did not hold any information falling within its scope.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Brighton and Hove City Council
10 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of communications specific to the Home Education Bill. Hampshire County Council stated that the information was not held for the purposes of the FOIA under the provisions of section 3(2). The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is not held by Hampshire County Council for its own purposes and therefore falls outside the definition of information held for the purposes of FOIA under section 3(2). The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
View Hampshire County Council
10 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about a pay review. The BBC disclosed some information and withheld some information under sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) and 36(2)(c) – prejudice to the conduct of public affairs and section 40 - personal data. The Commissioner is satisfied that sections 36(2)(b) and 40 are engaged in respect of all the information to which they have been applied. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any action. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0223 withdrawn.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36; FOI 40
View BBC
10 Oct 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to the proposed development of a Garden Community. Tendring District Council (the Council) provided some information but withheld the remainder citing regulations 12(5)(b) (the course of justice), 12(5)(e) (the confidentiality of commercial information), 12(4)(d) (unfinished documents) and 13 (personal information) of the EIR. The Commissioner has investigated its application of regulations 12(5)(b), 12(5)(e) and 12(4)(d). She has also considered the timeliness of its handling of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council cited regulations 12(5)(b) and 12(5)(e) appropriately. However, while she found that regulation 12(4)(d) was cited correctly in respect of some of the information withheld by virtue of that exception, she found that the Council failed to demonstrate that regulation 12(4)(d) was engaged in respect of the remaining withheld information. She also found that the Council breached regulations 5(2) (time for co
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 5
View Tendring District Council
9 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the number of times a specific councillor had objected to particular types of planning applications in a specific manner during a specified time period. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Section 10 of the FOIA. As a response has now been issued, the Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Kingston upon Thames Council
9 Oct 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about financial 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). However, she finds the Trust breached section 16 (duty to provide advice and assistance) of the FOIA. No steps are required as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View NORTHUMBRIA HEALTHCARE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST
9 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from the Homes & Communities Agency, now trading as Homes England (“Homes England”), relating to the calculation of the size of an endowment provided to Preston City Council under the terms of a Community Related Assets Agreement entered into by Homes England and Preston City Council in 2010. Homes England provided the complainant with some information, but withheld some detailed costings under regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR, since it considered that disclosure would adversely affect the confidentiality of commercial information. The Commissioner’s decision is that Homes England correctly considered the request under the EIR. However, she has determined that the exception at regulation 12(5)(e) is not engaged in respect of the withheld information. In addition, Homes England breached regulations 5(2) and 14(2) of the EIR, since it failed to respond to the complainant within 20 working days. The Commissioner requires Homes England to take the fo
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 14(2)(1); EIR 5(2)
View Homes England
9 Oct 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about the proposed development of Heights Leisure Centre, Sandown. Isle of Wight Council disclosed a redacted version of the information, withholding other information under the FOIA exemption for commercial interests (section 43(2)). During the Commissioner’s investigation the council reconsidered the request under the EIR, withholding the information under the exception for commercial confidentiality (regulation 12(5)(e)). The Commissioner’s decision is that Isle of Wight Council wrongly handled the request under the FOIA and breached regulation 5(1) and regulation 14 of the EIR and that it correctly withheld information under regulation 12(5)(e). The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 14; EIR 5(1)
View Isle of Wight Council
9 Oct 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to a community infrastructure charge laid on his property, and any information which led to legal proceedings being taken against him for the payment of money which the council considers he owes as a result of this charge. The council provided some information however it withheld other information on the basis that section 42 of the Act was applicable (legal professional privilege). However during the course of the Commissioner's investigation the council changed its decision to rely upon Regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR (course of justice). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to apply Regulation 12(5)(b) to the information and that the public interests rests in the exemption being maintained. The Commissioner does not therefore require the council to take any steps
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View West Lancashire Borough Council
8 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about parking charge revenues. The Commissioner’s decision is that Thanet District Council failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a substantive response, under the FOIA, to the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Thanet District Council
8 Oct 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to various council job roles relating to refuse collection within the council. The council refused the information on the basis that section 36(2) of the Act applied. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was not correct to withhold the information under section the exemption in section 36(2)(c). The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. To disclose the withheld information to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View Birmingham City Council