17 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the procedures followed by the Department for Education (DfE) when refusing a previous request under section 36 – inhibition to the free and frank exchange of views and advice. The DfE refused the follow up request under section 14(1) on the basis that it was vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DfE has not demonstrated that the follow up request is vexatious. Therefore the Commissioner finds it is not entitled to refuse to respond to the request under section 14(1). The Commissioner requires the public authority to issue a fresh response to the request without relying on section 14(1).
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Department for Education
14 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to an aircraft incident that occurred on 17 August 1988, and which caused the death of the then president of Pakistan, and then ambassador to Pakistan for the United States of America. The Home Office refused to confirm or deny whether information was held and cited the exemptions provided by sections 23(5), 27(4), and 31(3) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Home Office was entitled to rely upon the exemption provided by section 23(5) to neither confirm nor deny whether it held information within the scope of the request, which, if held, would be exempt by virtue of section 23(1).
Exemptions cited: FOI 23
View Home Office
14 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested recorded information which primarily concerns, or is related to, the Forest of Dean District Council’s enforcement notice served on the complainant in respect of the erection of a building without planning consent. The Council has refused parts of the complainant’s request in reliance on section 14(1) of the FOIA and on section 42. The Commissioner has decided that the Council is entitled to refuse to comply with the complainant’s request in reliance on section 14(1) of the FOIA on the grounds that it is vexatious.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Forest of Dean District Council
13 Sep 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Sunderland City Council (the Council) about salary spend within the Council. The Council refused to provide the requested information, citing section 12(1) (cost of compliance) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has provided a reasonable estimate of the costs associated with complying with the request and has therefore correctly applied section 12 of the FOIA. However, the Commissioner considers that the Council has not complied with its obligations under section 16 of the FOIA to provide the complainant with reasonable advice and assistance. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide the complainant with advice and assistance to allow him, if it is possible to do so, to formulate a request seeking information about salary spend within the Council which can be answered within the appropriate cost limit.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Sunderland City Council
13 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested DEFRA to disclose copies of all of the briefing notes and information given to Therese Coffey which include references to fly-tipping. DEFRA responded to the request citing regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. In accordance with regulation 11 of the EIR, the complainant requested an internal review. But to the date of writing, DEFRA has not responded or complied with the requirements of regulation 11. The Commissioner’s decision is that DEFRA has breached regulation 11 of the EIR by failing to respond to the complainant’s request for an internal review within 40 working days of receipt. The Commissioner requires DEFRA to issue its internal review response in accordance with the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11
13 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to charter flight mass deportations. 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 take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Home Office must issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
13 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested that the Goring on Thames Parish Council provides copies of email correspondence between a volunteer working group and a private company, carrying out work relating to the development of the Goring Neighbourhood Plan. In addition plans, drawings or proposals submitted to the Goring Neighbourhood Plan steering group or sub-group were requested. Goring on Thames Parish Council disclosed some of the information requested but stated that the email correspondence was not held in its own records. The Commissioner’s decision is that that under regulation 3(2)(b) of the EIR, any information falling within the scope of the request, that is held by the volunteer working group, is held by the council. The Commissioner requires Goring on Thames Parish Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: confirm or deny whether any information is held and issue a fresh response that complies with the terms of the EIR. This decision notice is c
Exemptions cited: EIR 3(2)(b)
13 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested all communications to and from a named doctor between June 10th 2015 and Sept 30th 2015 relating to the death of a named individual. The Trust provided the complainant with some information but withheld the majority of the requested information under section 42 FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 42 FOIA was applied correctly to the withheld information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 42
View University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust
13 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about land adjacent to a Redrow housing development in Huddersfield. Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council disclosed some information and withheld other information under the exceptions for commercial confidentiality (regulation 12(5)(e)) and interests of the information provider (regulation 12(5)(f)). The Commissioner’s decision is that Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council has failed to demonstrate that regulation 12(5)(e) and regulation 12(5)(f) is engaged. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the requested information to the complainant. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 12(5)(f)
View Kirklees Metropolitan Council
13 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding unpaid business rate accounts. City of York Council refused to disclose the requested information citing section 44(1)(a) of the FOIA by virtue of the statutory prohibition in section 2(2) of the Local Government Act. The Commissioner’s decision is that the exemption is not engaged, City of York Council incorrectly cited section 44(1)(a). The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the requested information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 44
View York City Council
13 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to whether or not proceedings were taken against the driver of a specific vehicle. West Mercia Police refused to provide the requested information citing section 40 (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the exemption under section 40(5)(b)(i) of the FOIA is engaged and that West Mercia Police was entitled to neither confirm nor deny whether it held the requested information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View West Mercia Police
13 Sep 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information regarding a viability assessment for a housing development scheme at the Knowle site in Sidmouth. East Devon District Council provided the relevant documents but redacted some information, under EIR regulation 12(5)(e), for commercial confidentiality. During the investigation and at the Commissioner’s direction the council reconsidered the request under the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that East Devon District Council has correctly applied regulation 12(5)(e) and is entitled to withhold the information. By initially failing to respond to the request under the correct regime, the Commissioner finds the council breached regulations 5(1) and 14(2). The Commissioner does not require East Devon District Council to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 14(2)(1); EIR 5(1)
View East Devon District Council
13 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a copy of a specific Equality Impact Assessment. The Commissioner’s decision is that Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council 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 the Council to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Wigan Council
13 Sep 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested the identity of the individual who gave authorisation for speed bumps on a particular street to be lowered. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough of Barnet (“the London Borough”) does not hold the requested information and has therefore complied with its Regulation 5(1) duty. However, it failed to issue an adequate refusal notice and failed to carry out an internal review within 40 working days and thus breached Regulation 14 and Regulation 11(4) of the EIR respectively. The Commissioner does not require any further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 14; EIR 5(1)
View Barnet Council
13 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about financial bonuses paid to Home Office staff in relation to deportation targets. 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
13 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information regarding immigration bail conditions. 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
13 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information regarding Operation Perceptor. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has failed to complete its deliberations on the balance of the public interest within a reasonable time and has therefore breached section 17(3) of the FOIA. The Commissioner also finds that the Home Office has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA. 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; FOI 17
View Home Office
13 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to members of the Windrush generation who have been wrongfully removed or deported. 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 take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Home Office must issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
12 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Wye Valley NHS Trust (the trust) concerning the usage of a Direct Engagement scheme. The trust responded to the complainant’s request but not within the statutory time for compliance stipulated in section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the trust breached section 10 of the FOIA in this case by failing to respond to the request in 20 working days. However, she notes that the trust has now responded and the complainant is otherwise satisfied with the information supplied. The Commissioner therefore does not require any further action to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Wye Valley NHS Trust
12 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to court proceedings with a specific case reference number. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) neither confirmed nor denied holding the requested information, citing sections 32(3) (court records) and 40(5) (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner has considered the MoJ’s application of section 40(5) of the FOIA. Her decision is that the MoJ was entitled to rely on that exemption to neither confirm nor deny holding the requested information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Ministry of Justice
11 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) about a grant it had awarded Southampton University to assist it in acquiring the Broadlands Archive. The HLF provided the complainant with some information falling within the scope of his request but sought to withhold further information on the basis of the following sections of FOIA: section 40(2) (personal data), section 41(1) (information provided in confidence), section 43(2) (commercial interests) and 44(1)(a) (statutory prohibition). The complainant sought to challenge the HLF’s reliance on these exemptions and also argued that it was likely to hold further information falling within the scope of some of these requests. The Commissioner has concluded that only some of the information which the HLF has withheld is exempt from disclosure on the sections 40(2), 41(1) and 44(1)(a) of FOIA; the remainder of the information which it sought to withhold is not exempt from disclosure and this information must be
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 40; FOI 41; FOI 44
View Big Lottery Fund
11 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested legal documents relating to a specific address. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough of Hounslow failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the London 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 London Borough of Hounslow
11 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Wealden District Council which is relates to an Excess Charge Notice – ECN102515, which he received on 8 August 2016. The Council has refused to comply with the complainant’s request in reliance on section 14(1) of the FOIA, on the grounds that the request is vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that Wealden District Council has correctly applied the exemption provided by section 14(1) of the FOIA to the complainant’s request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Wealden District Council
11 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested recorded information which concerns the names, addresses and contact information of persons holding licences for the provision of home boarder services. Portsmouth City Council has refused to provide the complainant with the information she has asked for in reliance on section 40(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Portsmouth City Council has correctly applied section 40(2) of the FOIA to the information which the complainant has requested.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Portsmouth City Council
11 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to an alleged breach of data security. Monmouthshire County Council (‘the Council’) provided some information and withheld other information under section 40(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied section 40(2) to the withheld information. She does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Monmouthshire County Council
11 Sep 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has asked the Department for Communities and Local Government [now the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government] to provide him with details of any communications between HRH the Duke of Cambridge and the Secretary of State which relate to environmental issues as defined by the Environmental Information Regulations 2004. The complainant has also requested details of any meetings with the Secretary of State to discuss environmental issues and to be provided with details of the time, date and venue of any meeting, a list of those present, together with an outline of the issues discussed and copies of any written briefing notes issued to the Secretary of State and departmental representatives. Having initially refused to comply with the complainant’s request on the grounds that it is not valid for the purpose of the EIR, the MHCLG determined that it should rely on Regulation 12(4)(b) on the grounds that the request is manifestly unreasonable. Following search
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2); EIR 9
View Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
11 Sep 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to Mount School playing field sale of land and proposed development. City of York Council confirmed that some information was not held and withheld other information under the exceptions for commercial confidentiality (regulation 12(5)(e)) and interests of the information provider (regulation 12(5)(f)). The Commissioner’s decision is that City of York Council complied with regulation 5(1), in failing to carry out an internal review, breached regulation 11(3) and regulation 11(4) and, failed to demonstrate that the exceptions in regulation 12(5)(e) regulation 12(5)(f) are engaged. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the information in parts 3, 4 and 5 of the request (excluding the personal data of third parties).
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 12(5)(f); EIR 5(1)
View York City Council
11 Sep 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested various information regarding planning permissions and associated Section 106 Agreements. Hertsmere Borough Council responded by either disclosing held information, advising where the held information was already publicly available and easily accessible, or denying that it was held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has complied with regulation 5(1). However, the Council did not comply with the requirements of regulation 5(2) and regulation 11(4). The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2)
View Hertsmere Borough Council
11 Sep 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant submitted a request to the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) for information about meetings between the Secretary of State and Prince of Wales. BEIS confirmed that one meeting had taken place during the time period of the request and provided the complainant with some briefing material related to this meeting. However, it sought to withhold further briefing material on the basis of either section 37(1)(aa) (communications with or relating to the heir to the Throne) of FOIA or regulation 12(4)(e) (internal communications) of the EIR. The Commissioner has concluded that section 37(1)(aa) has been applied correctly. However, she has also concluded that although some of the withheld information falls within the scope of the exception provided by regulation 12(4)(e) the public interest favours disclosing this information.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e); FOI 37
View Department for Business and Trade
11 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information in relation to Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust’s (the trust) patient transport policy. The trust has not to date responded to the request. 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 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the trust to issue a response in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View North London NHS Foundation Trust
11 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Camden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust (the trust) concerning the access to beds for female patients. The trust has not to date responded to the request. 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 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the trust to issue a response in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View North London NHS Foundation Trust
10 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about Lancashire Constabulary’s connection with the Lancashire Volunteer Partnership. After initially maintaining that it did not hold any relevant information, following the Commissioner’s intervention, Lancashire Constabulary disclosed such information as it did hold.
The Commissioner’s decision is that by failing to disclose to the complainant the information which it held within the statutory time for compliance, Lancashire Constabulary breached section 1(1) and section 10(1) of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Lancashire Constabulary
10 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from NHS Property Services Ltd about the land / Brownfield Site which the public authority manage on behalf of the NHS owning Trust(s), or others. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS Property Services Ltd 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 Property Services Ltd to respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
10 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the contract between Lancashire Constabulary and a digital media agency which provides web services for the Lancashire Volunteer Project. Following the Commissioner’s intervention, Lancashire Constabulary disclosed the information it held. The Commissioner’s decision is that by failing to comply with the request within the statutory time for compliance, Lancashire Constabulary breached section 1(1) and section 10(1) of the FOIA. As the information has been disclosed, the Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Lancashire Constabulary
10 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Hertsmere Borough Council about the current Hertsmere local plan, and in particular any documentation discussing or relating to the proposed Garden Village. The Commissioner’s decision is that Hertsmere Borough 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 Hertsmere Borough Council to respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Hertsmere Borough Council
10 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from NHS Property Services Ltd in relation to land of Countess of Chester Hospital Water Tower Site, managed by NHS Property Services Ltd and unauthorised occupation of the this land by Morris Homes Ltd including if this was invoiced for by NHS Property Services Ltd to Morris Homes Ltd. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS Property Services Ltd has breached regulation 5 (2) of the EIR 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 respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
10 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested emails held by the Vice Chancellor that contain the word ‘Brexit’. The Commissioner’s decision is that the University of Worcester has correctly applied section 36(2) to the withheld information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View University of Worcester
10 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested from Ashurst Parish Council (the Council) information relating to the development of a draft Neighbourhood District Plan (NDP) produced by a group of four parish councils. ‘SWAB’ is an acronym for Steyning, Wiston, Ashurst and Bramber parish councils which worked together to produce the plan. The Commissioner’s decision is that on a balance of probabilities the Council was correct to state that no further information is held. Therefore, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
7 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on NHS penalty charges for prescriptions, specifically a document showing the criteria for whether a person acted wrongfully or if there was an exceptional reason. NHS Business Services Authority (NHS BSA) disclosed its NHS Prescription & Penalty Charge Guide with some information redacted on the basis of section 31(1)(a) and 36(2)(c) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS BSA has correctly applied section 31(1)(a) to withhold information from the Penalty Charge Guide and that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. She therefore does not require NHS BSA to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View NHS Business Services Authority
7 Sep 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested that he be provided with a copy of legal advice obtained by Mid Sussex District Council (“the Council”) which the Council had referred to in relation to its decision to allow a development on land at East Grinstead. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly withheld the information under regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR, since the information is covered by legal professional privilege and disclosure would adversely affect the course of justice. She is satisfied that the balance of the public interest lies in maintaining the exception. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0213 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View Mid Sussex District Council
7 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Woking Borough Council (“the Council”) relating to meetings of the Local Development Framework Working Group. The Council withheld the information under regulation 12(4)(e) of the EIR – internal communications. The Commissioner’s decision is that the exception at regulation 12(4)(e) is engaged in this case. However, the balance of the public interest favours disclosure of the information. 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 information to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e)
View Woking Borough Council
7 Sep 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a request for information to the EPSRC for information on mid-term reviews of Centres for Doctoral Training including the scores awarded and any feedback provided. EPSRC confirmed it held scores, letters to the institutions confirming the scores as well as more detailed emails to individual researchers but considered this information should be withheld on the basis of section 40, 41 and 36(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that EPSRC is entitled to rely on section 36(2)(c) in relation to the emails to researchers and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. EPSRC is entitled to rely on sections 36(2)(b)(i), (ii) and (c) in regard to the scores and feedback letters to institutions but the public interest favours releasing the information. EPSRC is not entitled to rely on section 41 in relation to this information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the scores and feedback letters to the institutions it has withheld
Exemptions cited: FOI 36; FOI 41
View UK Research and Innovation
7 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from South East Coast Ambulance Service (SECAS) about ambulance handovers. At the date of this notice, SECAS has not provided a response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that: SECAS has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has not complied with section 1(1) within 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: Provide a response to the complainant’s request of 13 April 2018.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust
7 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information regarding a market rate evaluation on some allotments. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough of Wandsworth failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the London 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 London Borough of Wandsworth
7 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the performance of MyCSP. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Section 10 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 outlined in this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Cabinet Office
7 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the BBC about people who have been paid more than £150,000. At the date of this notice, the BBC has not provided a response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: The BBC has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has not complied with section 1(1) within 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: Provide a response to the complainant’s request of 11 June 2018.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View BBC
7 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested particular figures from the BBC for the last financial year. At the date of this notice, the BBC has not provided a response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: The BBC has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has not complied with section 1(1) within 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: Provide a response to the complainant’s request of 30 May 2018.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View BBC
7 Sep 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Billingham Town Council (the Council) information in relation to a phased return to work from long-term absence of a specific Council employee. The Council provided parts of the information requested and decided to withhold the remainder relying on section 40(2) (personal information), stating that it contains sensitive personal data. The Commissioner has exercised her discretion to consider section 40(5) (personal information). Her decision is that section 40(5) is engaged and that the Council should have refused to confirm or deny whether it held the requested information. The Commissioner also found that the Council has breached the requirement of section 17(7) by failing to inform the complainant of his right to complain to the Commissioner. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0203 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 40
7 Sep 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about representations that the Council had made to the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government and its predecessor department. 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
6 Sep 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to the creation of the council’s neighbourhood district plan. The council provided some information and directed the complainant to where other information is available from its website but said that no further information is held. It also withheld some information under Regulation 12(5)(f) as it was provided in confidence. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council does not hold any further information falling within the scope of the request. She has also decided that the council was correct to withhold some information under Regulation 12(5)(f). She has also decided that the council did not comply with the requirements of Regulation 5(2) in that it did not provide some information within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(f); EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2)