10 Aug 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested records created since 1 April 2017 relating to a Neighbourhood Plan for Old Somerby. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Parish Council failed to provide any evidence to support the decision to refuse the requests for information and is not entitled to rely on section 14(1) of the FOIA with regard to these requests.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
9 Aug 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Royal Borough of Greenwich (RBG) about documents relating to an undertaking provided to the Information Commissioner during a previous investigation. It is RBG’s position that it does not hold information falling within the scope of the request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that RBG does not, on the balance of probabilities, hold information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Royal Borough of Greenwich
9 Aug 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested a copy of a survey report from Frindsbury Extra Parish Council (“the Council”). The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is environmental information within the definition at regulation 2(1)(c) of the EIR. The request should, therefore, have been handled under the EIR rather than the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: reconsider the request under the provisions of the EIR and issue a fresh response to the complainant, and, to the extent that the Council withholds any of the requested information, it should issue a refusal notice that complies with regulation 14 of the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 2(1)
9 Aug 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the deportation of Afro-Caribbean British citizens. 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
9 Aug 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Home Office about the relationship between immigration removal targets and Senior Civil Service pay performance measures. 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 public authority to take the following step to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
9 Aug 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information regarding the deportation of Caribbean migrants over the past ten years. 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
8 Aug 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information about licenses for badger trapping/testing/culling. The Welsh Government provided some information but withheld other information under section 22 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request should have been handled under the EIR as opposed to the FOIA. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the Welsh Government disclosed the withheld information. In failing to treat the request under the appropriate access regime the Commissioner has determined that the Welsh Government breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Welsh Government
8 Aug 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on rail franchise contracts including information on subsidies, premium payments and total parent company support set aside by each franchisee or bidder. The Department for Transport (“DfT”) withheld this information on the basis of the exceptions at sections 44(1)(a), 41 and 21 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DfT has correctly refused to disclose the majority of the information on the basis of section 44(1)(a) by virtue of section 145 of the Railways Act 1993. For the remaining information on past premium payments she finds the DfT has correctly refused to provide the information on the basis of section 21.
Exemptions cited: FOI 21; FOI 44
View Department for Transport
8 Aug 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about action taken by Brighton and Hove Council as a result of the Supreme Court ruling regarding the ‘bedroom tax’. The Council initially withheld the information, relying on section 21 – information reasonably accessible by other means and section 22 – future publication, and later released the information intended for future publication. However, the complainant believed the Council held more information than was disclosed. The Commissioner’s decision is that Brighton and Hove Council did hold further information and therefore breached sections 1(1)(b) and 10 of the FOIA by initially failing to supply the information it held falling within the scope of the request, and failing to respond to the request within the statutory time for compliance. She also finds that the Council was not entitled to rely on section 21 as the information sought was not reasonably accessible by other means. As the Council has now provided all information held
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 21
View Brighton and Hove City Council
7 Aug 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the Crown Prosecution Service (the “CPS”) information about how a decision was reached in a particular case. The CPS would neither confirm nor deny (“NCND”) holding any information, citing section 40(5) (personal information) of the FOIA on the basis that, if it was held, it would be the personal data of third parties. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 40 is not engaged. She requires the CPS to confirm or deny whether any information is held and either disclose it or issue a fresh response which is compliant with section 17 of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Crown Prosecution Service
7 Aug 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information regarding planning enforcement actions. The Commissioner’s decision is that West Berkshire District Council is entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b), for manifestly unreasonable requests, to refuse to comply with the request. The Commissioner does not require West Berkshire District Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
View West Oxfordshire District Council
7 Aug 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about commendations awarded to police officers and civilian staff in 2007 for their work on a high profile criminal investigation. Staffordshire Police disclosed some information, but refused to disclose the names and job roles of all but one of the recipients, citing the exemptions at section 31 (law enforcement), section 38 (health and safety) and section 40 (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Staffordshire Police was entitled to rely on section 40 to withhold most of the information and on section 38 to withhold the remainder.
Exemptions cited: FOI 38; FOI 40
View Staffordshire Police
7 Aug 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a specific communication which Swindon Parish Council has withheld under Sections 14, 36(2), 40(2), 41 and 42 of the FOIA. The Commissioner is satisfied that Swindon Parish Council has successfully applied Section 40(2) of the FOIA to the requested information. The Commissioner does not requires the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Swindon Borough Council
6 Aug 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to surveys and repairs of a specified highway area over a specified timeframe. Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (the ‘Council’) disclosed some of the requested information, but withheld the remainder under Regulation 12(5)(b) – the course of justice etc – of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR to the withheld information and that the public interest in all the circumstances of the case favours maintaining the exception as set out in Regulation 12(5)(b).The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View Solihull Council
6 Aug 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to discretionary hardship awards for council tax. Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council disclosed some information and withheld some under section 40(2) (personal information) of the FOIA. It also confirmed that it did not hold some of the requested information.
The Commissioner’s decision is section 40(2) of the FOIA has been applied appropriately. The Commissioner also considers that in relation to some of the requested information, Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council was correct to state that it does not hold the information in question. However, the Commissioner considers that Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council has breached sections 10 (time for compliance) and 17 (refusal of a request) of the FOIA.
The Commissioner does not require Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 17; FOI 40
View Stockton-on-Tees Council
6 Aug 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the provision of Education Health Care Plans (EHCP) to children with special educational needs. The London Borough of Hackney (the Council) provided information in response, but the complainant said it was not the information he had requested. The complainant submitted a clarified request (request 2) and the Council refused this as repeated under section 14(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was not entitled to rely on section 14(2) in respect of request 2. The Commissioner also finds that the Council has failed to comply with section 1(1)(a), section 1(1)(b) and section 10(1) in that the information it has disclosed is not the information that was actually requested by the complainant in request 2.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View London Borough of Hackney
6 Aug 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Surrey Police relating to the case of an individual who was murdered. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request is vexatious and Surrey Police was entitled to apply section 14(1) (vexatious or repeated requests) of the FOIA to refuse the request. She also considers that Surrey Police was not obliged to issue a refusal notice in respect of the request, in accordance with section 17(6) (refusal of request) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0159 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Surrey Police
6 Aug 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to the Kendal transport infrastructure. Cumbria County Council initially handled the request under the FOIA. At the Commissioner’s direction the council reconsidered the request under the EIR, disclosing some information and withholding other information under the exceptions for personal data (regulation 13) and commercial confidentiality (regulation 12(5)(e)). The Commissioner’s decision is that Cumbria County Council wrongly handled the request under the FOIA and breached regulation 5(1) and 14 of the EIR, and that it failed to demonstrate the regulation 12(5)(e) is engaged. The Commissioner requires the council to disclose the withheld information to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 14; EIR 5(1)
View Cumbria County Council
6 Aug 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the loan of a painting. The National Gallery (the Gallery) refused the request under sections 21 (information accessible by other means), 31(prevention or detection of crime), 36(free and frank provision of advice and exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation), 40(third party personal information), 41(provided in confidence), 43 (commercial interests) and 42(legal professional privilege). The Commissioner is satisfied that sections 36, 40, 41 and 43 are engaged and, where applicable, the public interest favours maintaining the exemptions. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any action. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0194 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36; FOI 40; FOI 41; FOI 43
View National Gallery
6 Aug 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
Thecomplainant requested information from St Edmundsbury Borough Council (the Council) relating to a letter dated 31 July 2003. The Council confirmed it held a copy of the letter, but denied holding the specific requested information in recorded form. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council did not hold the requested information and it had therefore complied with the duty set out at section 1(1) (general right of access) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0185 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
3 Aug 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested details of all transactions over £25,000 from April to September 2017 in line with the government’s guidance on publishing spending data. The public authority withheld the requested information relying on section 22(1) FOIA. The Commissioner concluded that the public authority was not entitled to rely on section 22(1) FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 22
View HM Treasury
3 Aug 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information, including legal advice from Natural Resources Wales concerning the Bat Protocol currently in force for a specified building at the Rhydymwyn Valley Site. Natural Resources Wales provided some information but refused the legal advice in reliance on regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that Natural Resources Wales has complied with its obligations under regulation 5 of the EIR and it has correctly relied on regulation 12(5)(b) to refuse this information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 5
View Natural Resources Wales
3 Aug 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
Following a previous decision notice, the Welsh Government provided an explanation in terms of its record keeping and possible ways of refining a request about receipts held regarding expenditure charged on government procurement cards. It also provided some information in respect of a limited number of receipts but redacted the names on those receipts in reliance on section 40(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner is satisfied that disclosure of the withheld information would breach the Data Protection Act 1998 and in so doing, that section 40(2) FOIA is engaged. The Commissioner does not requires the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Welsh Government
2 Aug 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested rent, lease and ownership information about properties housing GP practices in Birmingham. NHS England (NHSE) provided a link to where some relevant information is published. It withheld other information under section 41(1) of the FOIA (information provided in confidence) and section 43(2) (commercially sensitive information). During the investigation, NHSE withdrew its reliance on section 41(1) with regard to some of the information and applied section 21(1) to this information (information already accessible to the applicant). The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: The information requested in requests 5 and 6 is exempt information under section 21(1). NHSE is correct to withhold the information requested in requests 1, 4 and 7 under section 43(2) and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 21; FOI 43
View NHS England
2 Aug 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested full details of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between Rutland County Council and the Ministry of Defence. The Commissioner’s decision is that Rutland County Council has wrongly applied the exemption at regulation 12(5)(e) to redact some information within the MoU. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the MoU in full. The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e)
View Rutland County Council
1 Aug 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested a copy of a viability assessment and associated District Valuer report relating to the Sowerby Gateway Development. Hambleton District Council withheld the requested information under the exception for commercial confidentiality – regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that Hambleton District Council has failed to demonstrate the regulation 12(5)(e) is engaged. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the requested information. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0192 withdrawn.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e)
31 Jul 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of legal advice which the Parish Council had previously announced an intention to seek, along with details of the individuals contacted to supply the advice. The Commissioner’s decision is that Potto Parish Council held no information within scope at the time the request was made and has therefore complied with its duty under Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act. The Commissioner does not require the Parish Council to take any further steps in relation to this request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
31 Jul 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about overseas trips taken by officials at NHS England. 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
View NHS England
31 Jul 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from NHS England in relation to reports produced by Pathway Analytics for NHS England concerning Sexual Assault Referral Centres since 1st April 2013. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS England has breached section 10 (1) of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the Home Office to respond to the complainant’s request in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View NHS England
31 Jul 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about overseas trips taken by officials at NHS England. 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; FOI 11; FOI 16
View Department for Work and Pensions
31 Jul 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about a clinical trial known as delta-9 that he believes took place at the Royal Marsden Hospital. The Commissioner’s decision is that Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) does not hold the requested information and found that there is no breach of section 16(1) of the FOIA (duty to provide advice and assistance). The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 16
View The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust
31 Jul 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested details of leisure centres which offered male-only swimming sessions. The Commissioner’s decision is that Leicester City Council was entitled to rely on Section 14 of the Freedom of Information Act to refuse the request. The Commissioner does not therefore require the Council to take any further steps in relation to this request. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0179 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Leicester City Council
30 Jul 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the Adult Social Care Precept. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough of Bromley failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Section 10 of the Freedom of Information Act. As a response has now been issued, the Commissioner does not require the London Borough to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Bromley Council
30 Jul 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested all information which makes up a successful bid for community dental services in Hertfordshire. NHS England refused to provide this information on the basis of section 43(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS England has correctly applied the section 43(2) exemption and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. She requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View NHS England
30 Jul 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the councils actions following a complaint made against a business. The council refused the request on the basis that section 30(1)(b) of the Act applies (investigations). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to apply the exemption and that the public interest rests in the exemption being maintained. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Warwickshire County Council
30 Jul 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the Government Indemnity Scheme (GIS) for works of art on loan. The Commissioner’s decision is that Arts Council England (ACE) has correctly applied section 41 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 10; FOI 41
View Arts Council England
27 Jul 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the HSE’s voluntary exit scheme held by the Cabinet Office. 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 Freedom of Information Act. 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 10
View Cabinet Office
27 Jul 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to parking revenues and the introduction of the new £1 coin. The Commissioner’s decision is that the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (“the London Borough”) failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Section 10 of the Freedom of Information Act (“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 Hammersmith and Fulham Council
27 Jul 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested copies of information provided to a specific firm for the purposes of carrying out a valuation on a specific property. The Commissioner’s decision is that Thanet District 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 Commissioner requires the Council 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 Thanet District Council
27 Jul 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
In three requests, the complainant has requested information about references that a doctor at Dicconson Group Practice (DGP) made in correspondence, and information about the redaction of Practice meeting minutes. In its response, DGP indicated that it holds no relevant information. The Commissioner’s decision is that: DGP breached section 1(1)(a) with regard to requests [1] and [2] but, on the balance of probabilities, has complied with section 1(1)(b) with regard to all three requests. DGP breached section 10(1) as it did not comply with section 1(1) within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require DGP to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0182 allowed in part.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
27 Jul 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about discussions that South Yorkshire Police had had with various third parties relating to the forcible removal of individuals protesting the removal of trees within the city of Sheffield. The Commissioner’s decision is that South Yorkshire Police failed to respond to the entirety of the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Section 10 of the Freedom of Information Act. The Commissioner requires SYP to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a substantive response, under the FOIA, to part [3] of the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View South Yorkshire Police
27 Jul 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the schedule of defined costs following a collision on the M4 Eastbound on a specific date. The Government Legal Department (GLD) has stated that it does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, GLD does not hold the requested information. Having failed to respond to the request for information within the statutory time frame of 20 working days, The Commissioner considers that GLD has breached section 10 of the FOIA. She does not require GLD to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Government Legal Department
26 Jul 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested the contact details of the Medical Director and confirmation that the individual was still the Executive Lead for safeguarding within the organisation. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS Nene Clinical Commissioning Group failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and therefore breached Section 10 of the Freedom of Information Act. As a response has now been issued, the Commissioner does not require the CCG to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
26 Jul 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant submitted a request to the Department for International Development (DFID) for a copy of the Terms of Reference for on external individual expert appointed by DFID to investigate the St Helena airport project. DFID refused to disclose this information citing the exceptions contained at regulations 12(5)(a) (adverse effect on international relations), 12(5)(b) (course of justice) and 12(5)(e) (confidentiality of commercial and industrial information) of the EIR. The Commissioner has concluded that the Terms of Reference and are exempt from disclosure on the basis of regulation 12(5)(b) and that in all of the circumstances of the case the public interest favours maintaining the exception. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0183 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View Department for International Development
26 Jul 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has asked Cambridgeshire County Council for a copy of the recorded contact it has had from two persons in respect of the replacement of two bollards. Relying on Regulation 13(5) of the EIR, the Council has refused to confirm or deny whether such information exists and is held. The Commissioner’s decision is that Cambridgeshire County Council has correctly applied Regulation 13(5) to the complainant’s request.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13(5)
View Cambridgeshire County Council
26 Jul 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a breakdown of information with regards to pedal cycle offences and other non-motorised vehicle offences. The Ministry of Justice (the MoJ) refused the request under section 32(1)(c) of the FOIA – court records. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 32(1)(c) of the FOIA is engaged. The Commissioner does not require the MoJ to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 32
View Ministry of Justice
26 Jul 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested the full building control file for a specific property. The Commissioner’s decision is that Bassetlaw District Council was entitled to rely on Regulation 13 (Personal Data) of the Environmental Information Regulations to withhold the requested information – with the exception of a single document. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the document titled “DWELLINGS – Accessibility” to the complainant. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0158 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(3); EIR 13(1)
View Bassetlaw District Council
26 Jul 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information with regards to development sites. Norwich City Council (the council) provided the information it held to part of the request, and requested clarification to the other part of the request. The Commissioner determined that the request was for environmental information and her decision is that the council breached regulation 14(1) of the EIR in not providing a valid refusal notice within the required timeframes, breached regulation 14(3) of the EIR for not refusing part of the request under regulation 12(4)(c) of the EIR – information formulated in too general a manner - and breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR in not providing the information it held within the required timeframes. The Commissioner also found that the council was able to request clarification from the complainant to the part of the request as per regulation 12(4)(c) of the EIR and has complied with regulation 9 of the EIR in providing appropriate advice and assistance. She also f
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(c); EIR 14(1); EIR 14(3); EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2)
View Norwich City Council
26 Jul 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Ulster University (“the University”) in relation to a tender for its Greater Belfast Development programme.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the University has incorrectly relied upon section 14(1) of the FOIA in relation to the complainant’s request. The Commissioner requires the University to issue a fresh response without reliance on section 14(1) of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Ulster University
26 Jul 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested to know the total severance payments made to two named individuals. Hastings borough Council (the council) initially refused the request under section 40(2) of the FOIA – third party personal data. During the Commissioner’s investigations it amended its response to refuse the request under section 40(5)(b)(i) of the FOIA – to neither confirm nor deny whether any severance payments were made. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 40(5)(b)(i) of the FOIA is engaged to this request. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Hastings Borough Council