27 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to Copeland Borough Council (the Council) for a copy of an agreement between the Mayor and the leader of the Labour group of councillors. The Council responded and explained that it did not hold a copy of the agreement. The complainant disputed this response on two grounds. Firstly, she argued that in her view it was likely that the Council did physically held a copy of the agreement. Secondly, she argued that even if this was not the case, then the Mayor held this agreement on behalf of the Council and therefore the Council can be said to hold it for the purposes of FOIA by virtue of section 3(2)(b) of the legislation. With regard to the first ground of complaint the Commissioner is satisfied that on the balance of probabilities the Council did not physically hold a copy of the agreement at the time of the request. With regard to the second ground of complaint, the Commissioner has concluded that the copy of the agreement held by the Mayor is not by
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 3
27 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a Freedom of Information request to the ICO for correspondence with the Home Office regarding its handling of FOI requests. The ICO disclosed some of the requested information but also withheld some information under the exemptions in section 44 (prohibitions on disclosure), section 31 (law enforcement) and section 40 (personal information). The Commissioner’s decision is that the section 44 exemption applies to all of the withheld information and the ICO dealt with the request in accordance with FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 44
View Information Commissioner
27 Jun 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the costs of senior management posts, payments made to individuals and senior management changes within the Council. The requests were made through a number of emails with the Council providing information at various points. In response to the final email sent by the complainant, the Council provided some information but withheld information about the departure of the Chief Executive citing the exemption under section 40(2) of the FOIA – third party personal data. Through the course of the Commissioner’s investigation further information was released to the complainant but as well as relying on section 40(2), it also applied sections 36(2)(b)(i) and 36(2)(b)(ii) and 36(2)(c) – prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs, and section 42 – legal professional privilege, to the withheld information. The Commissioner’s decision is that Bournemouth Borough Council has correctly applied sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii), 40(2) and 42 of the FOI
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 36; FOI 40(2); FOI 42
View Bournemouth Borough Council
27 Jun 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about a tender process associated with creating a dementia awareness video. Central London Community Healthcare NHS Trust (‘the Trust’) released some information having redacted some under section 40(2)(third person personal data). The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: The Trust has communicated to the complainant the majority of the information it holds that falls within the scope of five of his requests that is not exempt information, and has complied with section 1 of the FOIA with regard to this information. The Trust breached section 10(1) as it did not communicate all the relevant information it holds within the required timescale of 20 working days. The Trust can rely on section 40(2) to withhold the majority of the information to which it has applied this exemption as it is the personal data of third persons. It incorrectly applied section 40(2) to some of the withheld information; namely cost figures in the ‘Document 2’ email exch
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 40
View Central London Community Healthcare NHS Trust
27 Jun 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) information about Register records, the Approved Persons Scheme and particular costs. FCA released a significant amount of information and withheld some information under section 40(2) of the FOIA (third person personal data) and section 42 (legal professional privilege). The Commissioner’s decision is that: With regard to information that is not the complainant’s own personal data, on the balance of probabilities the Commissioner is prepared to accept that FCA has released all the information that it holds that falls within the scope of the complainant’s requests (that is not exempt information) and has complied with section 1(1) of the FOIA with regard to these requests. FCA has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has not complied with section 1(1) within the 20 days that is a requirement of the Act, with regard to some of the relevant information it holds. FCA breached section 17(1)(b) of the FOIA as it in
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 17
View Financial Conduct Authority
26 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to planning decisions which relate to a public footpath. He also requested information relating to a complaint which he made to the council. The council provided the majority of the information, however it withheld one document as it said that it was personal data relating to a third party under Regulation 13(1) and confirmed that it holds no further information falling within the scope of the request. The complainant considers that the council must hold further information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the document withheld under Regulation 13(1) was in fact personal data belonging to the applicant and therefore exempt under Regulation 5(3). She has also decided that on the balance of probabilities the council was correct to state that it holds no further information. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0156 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 13(1)
View Norfolk County Council
26 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of an application to install finials. Great Budworth Parish Council (the council) initially refused the request under section 14(1) of the FOIA as it considered it to be vexatious but later amended its response to ‘not held’. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council provided its final response outside the required 20 working day timeframe to respond and therefore breached section 10(1) of the FOIA. As the council has responded to the request, the Commissioner does not require it to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
26 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about legal advice obtained by Swinford Parish Council regarding a proposed amendment to the minutes of a particular Parish Council meeting. Swinford Parish Council refused to comply with the request on the grounds that it was vexatious within the meaning of section 14(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Swinford Parish Council was entitled to rely on section 14(1) of the FOIA to refuse to comply with the request. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0146 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
26 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to pre-application correspondence relating to a specific site which was part of a proposed local plan. The council initially applied Regulation 12(5)(e)(commercial confidentiality) and 12(5)(f)(interests of a third party) to the information. After reviewing its decision it disclosed some information but it applied Regulation 12(4)(b) (manifestly unreasonable) on the basis that it could not carry out further searches of its general file system without significantly affecting its network systems over a period of days. However during the course of the Commissioner’s investigation it said that it had carried out further searches and confirmed that it does not hold any relevant information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that on a balance of probabilities the council was correct to say that it does not hold any information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require the coun
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
View North Hertfordshire District Council
25 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made a two part request for information relating to a complaint he submitted to NHS England, and information relating to its decision not to accept his reason for not attending any of the medical practices offered to him. NHS England withheld all the information, citing the exemption under section 40(1) (personal information) of the FOIA as its basis for doing so. The complainant considers NHS England’s reasons for withholding the requested information are neither valid nor fair. The complainant is also concerned that NHS England has not complied with its obligations under section 1(1), section 10(1) and section 17(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS England has complied with its obligations under section 1(1), section 10(1) and section 17(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner also finds that the requested information was exempt from disclosure under section 40(1) of the FOIA but NHS England should have cited section 40(5)(a) to neither confirm nor de
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 17; FOI 40
View NHS England
25 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about a named police investigation. City of London Police (CoLP) would neither confirm nor deny holding the information, citing the exemption at section 40(5) (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that CoLP was correct to neither confirm nor deny holding information within the scope of the request by virtue of section 40(5)(b)(i) of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View City of London Police
25 Jun 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to pollution measurements, accident and collisions and works carried out on a specified section of the A2. Medway Council refused to comply with some parts of the complainant’s request but refused to comply with other parts of the request in reliance on Regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR, where the Council advised the complainant that his request was manifestly unreasonable. The Commissioner’s decision is that Medway Council correctly applied Regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR to part 4 of the complainant’s request. The Commissioner determined that the Council is entitled to aggregate all of the parts of the complainant’s request for the purpose of its application of Regulation 12(4)(b). The Commissioner has also decided that the Council breached Regulation 9 of the EIR by failed to provide advice and assistance to the complainant in respect of his request, and also that it breached Regulation 5(2) by failing to respond to the complainant’s re
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b); EIR 5(2); EIR 9
View Medway Council
25 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service (NIAS) regarding private ambulance transfers. The NIAS has not to date provided a response to the complainant’s request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the NIAS has breached sections 1(1)(b) and 10(1) of FOIA.
The Commissioner requires the NIAS to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
To provide a full response to the complainant’s request
The NIAS must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Northern Ireland Ombudsman
25 Jun 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information contained in submissions from HM Treasury officials to Ministers concerning Vehicle Excise Duty for Budgets 1999 and 2000. The public authority disclosed most of the information held and withheld the remainder relying on the exceptions at regulations 12(4)(e) EIR in respect of all of the withheld information and 12(5)(e) EIR in respect of some of the withheld information. The Commissioner partially upheld the application of regulation 12(4)(e) but concluded that the public authority was not entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(e).
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e); EIR 12(5)(e)
View HM Treasury
22 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to closed file FCO 57/875 “Soundings of Candidates for New Year and the Queen’s Birthday Honours, on behalf of the Prime Minister’s Office”. The Commissioner’s decision is that The National Archives (TNA) has correctly applied section 37(1)(b) of the FOIA (Communications with Her Majesty, etc. and honours) to the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 37
View The National Archives
22 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested recorded information from Derbyshire County Council which concerns the Council’s proposals for its restructuring of its senior management team. The Council provided the complainant with a copy of the Local Government Association report but advised him that it was withholding some information in reliance on sections 40(1), 40(2), 42 and 36 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Derbyshire County Council has correctly applied the exemptions to disclosure provided by sections 40(1), 40(2), 42 and 36 of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 36; FOI 40; FOI 42
View Derbyshire County Council
21 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainants requested information about costs paid to a company employed by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in connection with the recovery of assets from them. The CPS said that the information constituted the complainants’ own personal data, and cited the exemption at section 40(1) (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner agreed that the request was for the complainants’ own personal data. The Commissioner’s decision is that the CPS should have cited section 40(5)(a) to neither confirm nor deny whether it held the requested information. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Crown Prosecution Service
21 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information with regards to a bus service. The council provided its response but provided it outside the required timeframes. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council breached section 10(1) of the FOIA. As the response has now been issued, the Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Liverpool City Council
21 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”) any statistical records, impact assessments and evaluations created and kept by its Counter Terrorism Internet Referrals Unit (“CTIRU”). Having initially found that the information was exempt, the MPS subsequently provided some information and advised that no further information was held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, no further information is held by the MPS. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Metropolitan Police Service
21 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating correspondence and communications between the Director General and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. The BBC provided information in response to this request but made redactions under section 36(2)(b)(ii) and 36(2)(c) FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the BBC correctly applied section 36(2)(b)(ii) FOIA to the redacted information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View BBC
21 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested rent values for facilities that are part of a Waste PFI contract. Cambridgeshire County Council withheld the information under the exception for commercial confidentiality – regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that Cambridgeshire County Council has failed to demonstrate that regulation 12(5)(e) is engaged. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the information to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e)
View Cambridgeshire County Council
20 Jun 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the identities of any parties who have threatened or commenced legal action about a parking order. Colchester Borough Council withheld the information under section 41(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The complainant disputed the application of this exemption. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly withheld the information under section 41(1). However, the Council 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 public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 41
View Colchester City Council
20 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information held by the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) into delayed payments to suppliers the impact of the falling pound on NHS finances following the referendum on exiting the European Union. The DHSC confirmed it held a report on the analysis on the potential effects of the UK’s exit from the European Union and the rate of pound sterling on NHS finances but considered this exempt from disclosure by virtue of the exemptions at sections 43, 36, 27 and 29 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DHSC has correctly applied sections 43(2), 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) to withhold the information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36; FOI 43
View Department of Health and Social Care
20 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a range of policies, procedures, work instructions and information of a similar nature. The Council disclosed information. The complainant contested that further information was held. The Commissioner’s decision is that it is likely that further information is held, and that the Council has failed to fully consider and respond to the request in accordance with section 1(1). In failing to comply with section 1(1), the Council has breached section 10(1). The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Issue a fresh response to the request that complies with the terms of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Nottingham City Council
19 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Nettleden with Potten End Parish Council (the Council) information in relation to proposed telecommunication mast on Spencer Holland Sports Field. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on the exemption at section 42(1) of the FOIA to withhold the information. Therefore the Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 42
19 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office about requests received under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR). 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 to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
19 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office about Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children (UASC). 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
19 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office about cases where citizenship nullification is under review. 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 issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office about cases where citizenship nullification is under review. 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 issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
19 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office in relation to the assistance it provided to an author in relation to the writing of a book. 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
19 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to a health and safety risk assessment, and fire risk assessment of the Liverpool Echo Arena car park. Liverpool City Council has failed to respond to this request.
The Council must provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
The Council must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Liverpool City Council
19 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information in the form of a report prepared about matters within a named primary school in Northern Ireland. The Department of Education Northern Ireland (“the Department”) refused to disclose that information, citing sections 38 and 41 of the FOIA as a basis for non-disclosure. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department has correctly applied section 41 of the FOIA to the entirety of the requested information, so she did not go on to consider its application of section 38. The Commissioner therefore requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41
View Department of Education (Northern Ireland)
19 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on sources of revenue income for a number of Commissioning Support Units (CSU’s). NHS England provided overall figures but refused to break this down further into funding received from Clinical Commissioning Group’s (CCG’s), other NHS bodies and non-NHS bodies on the basis of section 43(2) of the FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that NHS England has failed to demonstrate that there would be prejudice to the commercial interests of the CSU’s if the information were to be disclosed. The Commissioner finds the section 43(2) exemption is not engaged. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the information requested at parts a), b) and c) of the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View NHS England
18 Jun 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to Desborough Town Council’s (the Council’s) office opening times. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly applied section 1 of the FOIA, but breached section 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
18 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the minutes of specific meetings held by Kirby Muxloe Parish Council. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council 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 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
18 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has submitted two requests for information to East Riding of Yorkshire Council about the status and application of the Local Plan. The Council disclosed information in response. The complainant contests that further information is held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has complied with request 1 and request 2 (parts A and C). However, the Commissioner has found that the Council has not responded to request 2 (part B) in accordance with the EIR. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: Issue a fresh response to request 2 (part B) that complies with the terms of the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1)
View East Riding of Yorkshire Council
18 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from City of London Corporation (COL) information relating to the ethnic background of the members of Police Committee. COL provided some information to the complainant, but stated that the remainder was not held.
The Commissioner’s decision is that, on balance of probabilities, COL does not hold information further to that already provided.
The Commissioner does not require COL to take any steps in order to comply with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View City of London Corporation
18 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the trust relating to its non-emergency ambulance service. To the date of this notice, the trust has failed to respond to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the trust has breached section 10 of the FOIA by failing to respond to the request within 20 working days of receipt. The Commissioner requires the trust to respond to the request in accordance with the FOIA. It should either disclose the requested information or issue an appropriate refusal notice under section 17 of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
18 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (“the Council”) regarding meetings attended by a named councillor. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council provided the complainant with all of the recorded information falling within the scope of the request which it holds, and has therefore complied with its obligations under section 1 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council
15 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a freedom of information request to the Charity Commission for correspondence and communications regarding a particular charity. The Charity Commission initially refused the request under the section 31 (law enforcement exemption) but during the course of the Commissioner’s investigation changed its position and applied section 12 (cost exceeds the appropriate limit) instead. Commissioner’s decision is that cost of complying with the request would exceed the appropriate limit and that therefore section 12 was correctly applied. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View The Charity Commission
15 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Fenland District Council (“the Council”) about whether it has a list of accessible vehicles published in accordance with section 167 of the Equality Act 2010.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council breached sections 1(1) and 10(1) of the FOIA as it did not, within the statutory time for compliance, inform the complainant in writing whether it held information of the description specified in the request nor provide him with the information. The complainant has now been provided with the information he requested and the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Fenland District Council
15 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a freedom of information request to the Department for Transport for details of representations made by airlines on the future of the EU 261 regulation and passenger compensation arrangements after the UK leaves the European Union. The DfT refused the request under the exemption in section 35(1)(a) (formulation and development of policy) and section 27 (international relations). The Commissioner has decided that section 35(1)(a) was correctly applied to the withheld information and the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35
View Department for Transport
15 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested details of the amounts that the Cabinet Office has spent on consultancy services. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office is entitled to rely on Section 21 to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the Cabinet Office to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 21
View Cabinet Office
15 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a copy of a Board document. The NHS Improvement (NHSI) refused the request under sections 36(2)(b) and 36(2)(c) as it considered that disclosure would inhibit the free and frank provision of advice or exchange of views, or would otherwise prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs. The Commissioner’s decision is that NHSI correctly applied section 36(2)(b) of the FOIA to the withheld information and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any action. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View NHS England
14 Jun 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to two unsolved murders committed in 1987. Kent Police refused to provide the requested information, citing sections 30(1)(a) (investigations and proceedings) and 40(2) (personal information) of the FOIA as its basis for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that Kent Police was entitled to apply section 30(1)(a) of the FOIA to withhold the information. However, she found that Kent Police failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and therefore breached section 10(1) (time for compliance with request) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 30
View Kent Police
14 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information in relation to flood risk and a planning application. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, North Yorkshire County Council does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require North Yorkshire County Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
View North Yorkshire County Council
14 Jun 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from the Home Office information on meetings attended by ministers at the Defence and Security Equipment International 2015. The Home Office withheld the information in its entirety citing the exemptions under Sections 21, 27, 35, 36, 40 and 43 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Home Office has successfully engaged Section 36(2)(b) to some of the requested information with the exception of the dates and locations of the meetings to which Section 21 was not engaged and the names and positions of those present to which Section 40(2) was not engaged. The Commissioner found that the Home Office did not hold any information regarding the length of the meetings. The Commissioner has also decided that Home Office breached Section 10 of the FOIA by failing to respond to the complainant’s request promptly or in any event within 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legisla
Exemptions cited: FOI 21; FOI 36; FOI 40
View Home Office
14 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to an apparent late night high speed pursuit by Thames Valley Police. Thames Valley Police would neither confirm nor deny holding information by virtue of section 30(3) (Investigations and proceedings) and section 40(5) (Personal Information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Thames Valley Police was entitled to rely on section 30(3) of the FOIA to neither confirm nor deny holding the information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30
View Thames Valley Police
13 Jun 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from NHS Devon Clinical Commissioning Group (DCCG) information regarding policies, procedures, practices, standards and guidelines. The Commissioner’s decision is that DCCG failed to respond to the request within the statutory time limit of 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of the FOIA. As the requested information has now been provided, the Commissioner does not require DCCG to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
13 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information on the costs claimed against drivers responsible for damaging road infrastructure by one of Highways England’s contractors. Highways England (HE) refused to comply with the request under section 14(1) on the basis that it was vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that HE is entitled to rely on section 14(1) to refuse to comply with the request. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any further action in this matter.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View National Highways
13 Jun 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) about Lewisham Council’s Parks for People project for Beckenham Place Park. The HLF refused to comply with the request relying on section 14 FOIA – vexatious request and regulation 12(4)(b)EIR manifestly unreasonable request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the only points one and two constitute valid requests and that HLF is correct to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) to refuse to comply with the request. She does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
View Big Lottery Fund