25 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the prescribing of Dexamethasone and Cyclophosphamide. The Commissioner’s decision is that The Callowland Surgery (the surgery) has breached section 10 (time for compliance) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Provide a response to the complainant’s request. 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. The Commissioner notes that a medical practice itself is not for the purposes of FOIA a public authority. Rather, each GP who provides primary medical services is a public authority themselves and has a duty to reply to a request in accordance with section 1 of FOIA. However, the Commissioner ackno
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
25 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the buildings insurance policies that the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea holds. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Royal Borough has 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 public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Issue a substantive response, under the Act, to the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea
25 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the amounts of payments through personal companies. The BBC failed to respond to this request for information and the Commissioner’s decision is that in doing so the BBC breached section 10(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View BBC
25 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding the figures for self-harm in immigration detention centres for October to December 2017. 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
25 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about a review he believes is being carried out into the Yorkshire Ripper case. West Yorkshire Police would neither confirm nor deny holding information by virtue of section 30(3) (Investigations and proceedings) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that West Yorkshire Police was entitled to rely on section 30(3) of the FOIA to neither confirm nor deny holding the information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30
View West Yorkshire Police
25 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Scotland Office seeking copies of communications it exchanged with the HM Treasury, along with notes of any meetings between the two departments, about the confidence and supply arrangement with the DUP which the government agreed in June 2017. The Scotland Office refused to confirm or deny whether it held any information falling within the scope of the request on the basis of the exemptions contained at sections 28(2), by virtue of section 28(1) (relations within the UK) and 35(3) by virtue of sections 35(1)(a) (formulation and development of government policy) and (b) (Ministerial communications) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that section 28(2) is not engaged. She accepts that section 35(3) is engaged, however she has concluded that the public interest in the Scotland Office confirming whether it holds the requested information outweighs the public interest maintaining the exemption.
Exemptions cited: FOI 28; FOI 35
View Scotland Office
25 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information on an injunction order in connection with a road closure. The Commissioner’s decision is that Nottinghamshire County Council has responded to the request correctly and fulfilled its responsibilities under the Environmental Information Regulations (EIR).
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2)
View Nottinghamshire County Council
25 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested details of a £2.5 million settlement for a contractual claim which was listed in the Home Office’s (“HO”) 2015-16 annual accounts. The HO refused to provide the requested information citing section 43(2) (commercial interests) of the FOIA as its basis for doing so; it later added reliance on section 41(1) (information provided in confidence). The Commissioner’s decision is that neither exemption is engaged and she therefore requires the HO to either disclose the requested information or issue a fresh response, compliant with section 17 of the FOIA, which does not rely on section 43(2) or 41(1).
Exemptions cited: FOI 41; FOI 43
View Home Office
24 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of communications between the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACOBA) and George Osborne, including all discussions in relation to an application by Mr Osborne to ACOBA further to his appointment as editor of the Evening Standard. ACOBA withheld the information held within the scope of the request relying on the exemptions at sections 36(2)(b), 36(2)(c) and 40(2) FOIA. The Commissioner concluded that ACOBA was entitled to rely on the exemptions at section 36(2)(b) FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View Advisory Committee on Business Appointments
24 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Cabinet Office asking for information about the meeting which took place on 21 July 2005 between Tony Blair and Sir Ian Blair, the then Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police. The Cabinet Office initially responded by explaining that although it held information confirming that this meeting took place, it did not hold any further information falling within the scope of the request. It subsequently amended this position and explained that it did hold further information falling within the scope of this request but it considered this to be exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 23(1) (security bodies), 24(1) (national security), 31 (law enforcement), 38 (health and safety) and 40 (personal data) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that the withheld information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 23(1) or section 24(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 23; FOI 24
View Cabinet Office
24 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding proposals for cladding of buildings involving flammable materials that was held at the time of the Grenfell Tower disaster. Brighton and Hove City Council provided information in response to the request however the complainant considered that further information must be held. The Commissioner’s decision, is that on the balance of probabilities Brighton and Hove City Council does not hold further information within the scope of the request and therefore has complied with its duties under section 1(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Brighton and Hove City Council
24 Apr 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) for information about the kidnapping and murder of British journalist and UN aid worker, Alec Collett, that took place in Beirut during March 1985. The FCO disclosed some information but sought to withhold further information on the basis of the following sections of FOIA: 24(1) (national security); 27(1)(a), (c), (d) and 27(2) (international relations); 38(1)(a) (health and safety); 40(2) (personal data) and 41(1) (information provided in confidence). The FCO also sought to refuse to confirm or deny whether it held any further information falling within the scope of the request on the basis of the exemptions contained at sections 23(5) (security bodies) and 24(2) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that he FCO is entitled to rely on all of the above exemptions in the manner it which is has. However, she has also concluded that the FCO breached section 17(3) by failing to complete its public interest t
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 23; FOI 24; FOI 27; FOI 38; FOI 40; FOI 41
24 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested “a decision letter” in a planning matter. Torridge District Council (“the Council”) avers it does not hold the said letter. The Commissioner’s decision is that Torridge District Council holds the requested information and it should convey it to the complainant or issue a refusal notice pursuant to Regulation12.
Please note that the complainant, complained to the Information Commissioner on 8 March 2017 and not on 16 June 2017 as erroneously stated in the Decision Notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 14
View Torridge District Council
23 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on information relating to Cabinet discussions concerning the European Union (‘EU’) referendum in the period immediately before and after the referendum. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office has appropriately relied on section 35(3) for section 35(1)(a) and (b) (Formulation of government policy etc.) to refuse the request. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take the any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35
View Cabinet Office
23 Apr 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to a planning application. Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service disclosed some information and explained that it did not hold any further information.
The Commissioner’s decision is that Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service is correct to state that it does not hold any further information. She therefore considers that it has not breached regulation 12(4)(a)(information not held) of the EIR. However, she considers that it has breached regulations 5(2) (time for compliance) and 11(4) (representations and reconsiderations) of the EIR.
The Commissioner does not require Hampshire and Fire Rescue Service to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11; EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 5(2)
View Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service
23 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to criminal justice proceedings involving a named individual. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) neither confirmed nor denied holding information relating to the individual named in the request, citing section 40(5) (personal data) of the FOIA. The Commissioner's decision is that the CPS was not obliged to confirm or deny if the requested information was held by virtue of section 40(5)(b)(i) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Crown Prosecution Service
23 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to HE’s Asset Support Contracts (ASC contracts) with a number of different contractors. Some information was provided but other information was withheld under section 43 of the FOIA. With regards to the application of section 43 of the FOIA, the Commissioner is satisfied that this exemption applies and that the public interest in favour of disclosure, in this case, is outweighed by the public interest in favour of maintaining the exemption. During the Commissioner’s investigation, the complainant raised concerns that Highways England (HE) holds further recorded information. The Commissioner is satisfied that on the balance of probabilities HE does not hold any further recorded information of the nature specified. The Commissioner does not require any further action to be taken. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0104 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 43
View National Highways
23 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Sedlescombe Parish Council (the Parish Council) relating to a decision about judicial review of a planning decision. The Parish Council disclosed some information but refused to provide the remainder, citing sections 41(information provided in confidence) and 42 (legal professional privilege) of the FOIA. The Commissioner has investigated the Parish Council’s application of section 42 of the FOIA to the information withheld by virtue of that exemption. The Commissioner has concluded that the Parish Council was entitled to rely on the exemption at section 42(1) of the FOIA to withhold the information. She requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 42
20 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested various information in furtherance of an on-going dispute with Lancashire Constabulary. Lancashire Constabulary refused the request as vexatious under section 14(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the requests were vexatious and so section 14(1) of the FOIA meant that Lancashire Constabulary was not obliged to comply with them.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
19 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has asked four questions about export licences. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Foreign & Commonwealth Office has issued a response to the first question but has failed to complete its deliberations on the balance of the public interest in relation to the remaining three questions within a reasonable time period and has therefore breached Section 17(3) of the Freedom of Information Act. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Issue a substantive response, under the Act, to questions 2, 3 and 4 of the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17
19 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the drop-in service at Notting Hill Methodist Church. She has also requested details of new training provided to staff. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea has failed to respond to either request within 20 working days and has therefore breached Section 10 of the Freedom of Information Act. The Commissioner requires the public authority issue a substantive response, under the Act, to each request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea
19 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested detailed information relating to all crimes reported in Surrey for a period of several years. Surrey Police refused the request as vexatious under section 14(1) of the FOIA on the basis of the burden that it would impose. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was vexatious and so section 14(1) applied and Surrey Police was not obliged to comply with it.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Surrey Police
19 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from the Royal Borough of Greenwich (“the Council”) regarding a gate at his property. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied the exception at regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR to one part of the request, and does not hold any information relating to two parts of the request. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 5(1)
View Royal Borough of Greenwich
19 Apr 2018Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information in relation to planning applications in respect of a specific property. London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (“the Council”) has disclosed most of the requested information to the complainant, however it refused to disclose the remainder, citing regulations 12(4)(e), 12(5)(f) and 13 as a basis for non-disclosure.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied regulation 13 of the EIR to the information specifically withheld under it. The Commissioner has further decided that the Council has incorrectly applied regulations 12(4)(e) and 12(5)(f) to the information it withheld under those regulations. The Commissioner also finds that the Council breached Regulation 11(4) of the EIR. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: To disclose the information previously withheld under regulations 12(4)(e) and 12(5)(f) of the EIR to the complainant. The publi
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e); EIR 12(5)(f); EIR 13
View Hammersmith and Fulham Council
19 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested minutes of various meetings as well as the Borden Grammar School’s (“the School’s”) Improvement Plan, annual report and annual budget allocation. The School has not responded to this request. The Commissioner considers that the School breached section 10(1) FOIA in the handling of this request. The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View BOURNE GRAMMAR SCHOOL
18 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about any advice given by Bedfordshire Police to a television production company, about contacting crime victims and their families. The Commissioner’s decision is that Bedfordshire Police breached sections 1(1) and 10(1) of the FOIA by failing to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory 20 working day time limit. The Commissioner requires Bedfordshire Police to issue a response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Bedfordshire Police
17 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of all comments made on a planning application. Breckland Council (the council) referred the complainant to its planning website for the comments held. The complainant was not satisfied with the information provided as he stated some comments had been removed and he wanted copies of these also. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council does not hold the deleted comments and has provided the complainant with the information it does hold. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Breckland Council
17 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to an historic police investigation and trial. West Midlands Police (WMP) refused the request on the grounds that it imposed a grossly oppressive burden and therefore was vexatious under section 14(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was not vexatious and so section 14(1) was relied on incorrectly. WMP is now required to issue a fresh response to the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View West Midlands Police
17 Apr 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested recorded information on how the Council handles formal complaints that involve the harm of a vulnerable adult.
The Commissioner’s decision is that Wigan Council has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA (time for compliance) by failing to provide the complainant with all relevant information (in this case a procedure) within 20 working days. The Commissioner also finds that the Council has not breached section 1(1)(a) or 1(1)(b) of the FOIA because it confirmed it held the information and provided a working website link to some of it within 20 working days, and subsequently provided a further relevant document by the time the internal review was completed. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0105 allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1)(a); FOI 1(1)(b); FOI 10
View Wigan Council
17 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the species of Borrelia used to create the VISE component of the Lyme Immunoblot test. Public Health England stated that the requested information was not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that on a balance of probabilities Public Health England do not hold the stated information. The Commissioner does not require Public Health England to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View UK Health Security Agency
17 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information with regards to a contract. Lewannick Parish Council provided information it held but the complainant considered the council would hold further information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has provided the information it holds within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
16 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from HMT about the proceeds from unclaimed wrecks in accordance with section 243 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995. HMT stated that it did not hold information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, HMT does not hold the requested information and it has complied with the duty set out at section 1(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View HM Treasury
16 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of correspondence concerning the Welsh Crown Bowling Association. Sport Wales confirmed that it had provided all the information it could on the matter in question and referred to a previous decision notice issued by the Commissioner. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation Sport Wales confirmed it considered the request to be vexatious under section 14 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Sport Wales is entitled to rely on section 14(1) of the FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner does not require Sport Wales to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
16 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information about the Joint Working Agreement (‘JWA’) for the Swansea Bay City Deal. Carmarthenshire County Council (‘the Council’) confirmed it did not hold some information and withheld a copy of the draft JWA under section 42 of the FOIA. Following the Commissioner’s intervention, the Council agreed that the request should have been considered under the EIR and confirmed that it considered regulation 12(5)(b) to apply. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied regulation 12(5)(b) to the withheld information. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View Carmarthenshire County Council
16 Apr 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the technical reports on the aptitude tests UKCAT provides and which are used by various medical schools as part of their admissions process. UKCAT withheld the information under section 43(2), prejudice to commercial interests. The Commissioner’s decision is that UKCAT is entitled to withhold some of the information from the reports. This is primarily that information analysing how well the actual test questions (referred to as ‘items’) performed. However, the Commissioner finds that some of the more general information and the analyses of how examinees performed is not exempt and should be disclosed. Although not cited by the public authority the Commissioner also finds that some of the personal data contained in the reports can be withheld under section 40(2). The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the information identified in the confidential annex that accompanies this notice and which will be provided exclusively to the public au
Exemptions cited: FOI 40; FOI 43
16 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on other information requests made to Highways England on sub-threshold claims including steps taken to locate information and conclude no information was held. The request also asked for the fields used by Highways England’s contractors when sending information to Highways England. Highways England refused the request as vexatious under section 14(1)The Commissioner’s decision is that Highways England was not entitled to refuse to comply with the request under section 14(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to issue a fresh response to the request which does not rely on section 14(1) of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View National Highways
13 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the formation of a private limited company subsequently known as 3 Rivers Developments Ltd. Mid Devon District Council disclosed some information and withheld other information under the exemptions for commercial interests (section 43(2)) and legal professional privilege (section 42). The Commissioner’s decision is that Mid Devon Council failed to disclose information within the statutory time limit and breached section 1(1) and section 10(1) of the FOIA and, in respect of the withheld information, it failed to demonstrate that section 43(2) is engaged. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the information withheld under section 43(2). Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0102 part-allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 43
View Mid Devon District Council
13 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from the Home Office the annual cost of chartered deportation flights for 2016. The Home Office withheld the information under Section 43(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has incorrectly applied Section 43(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the information requested by the complainant on 24 February 2017. The public authority must take this step within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View Home Office
13 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the University of Southampton relating to various externally funded research projects. The University has failed to respond to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that: the University has breached sections 1(1) and 10(1) of the FOIA in the handling of the request. The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View University of Southampton
12 Apr 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the museum’s sponsorship arrangements with BP, agreed in 2016, which were due to commence 1 January 2018. The museum disclosed some information, confirmed that much of the requested information is not held and applied section 40 and 43 to elements of its agreement with BP. With regards to whether further recorded is held, the Commissioner is satisfied that, on the balance of probabilities, the museum does not hold any further recorded information to that already provided. With regards to this element of the complainant, the Commissioner requires no further action be taken. In respect of the museum’s agreement with BP, the Commissioner has considered the application of section 43 of the FOIA, to the remaining withheld information. With the exception of clause 3.8, the Commissioner is satisfied that section 43 of the FOIA applies and the public interest in favour of disclosure is outweighed by the public interest in maintaining the ex
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View British Museum
12 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the cost of retaining trees on Rustlings Road. Sheffield City Council (the council) refused to provide the requested information citing section 12(1) of the FOIA (cost exceeds appropriate limit). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council is not required to comply with the request and has correctly cited section 12(1). The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View Sheffield City Council
12 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of emails. Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (the Council) failed to respond to the request and in so doing breached sections 1(1) and 10(1) of the FOIA. It is now required to respond to the complainant’s request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Sandwell Council
12 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to traineeships. The ESFA has failed to respond to this request. The Commissioner considers that the ESFA breached section 10(1) FOIA in the handling of this request. The Commissioner requires the public authority provide the complainant with a response to this request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Education and Skills Funding Agency
11 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to costs incurred by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in relation to specified criminal and judicial review proceedings. The CPS refused to either confirm or deny holding information within the scope of the request, citing section 40(5) (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the CPS was correct to neither confirm nor deny holding information within the scope of the request by virtue of section 40(5)(a) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Crown Prosecution Service
11 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about briefings provided to Staffordshire Police staff on Operation Kalmia. Staffordshire Police 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 found that the request was not vexatious and therefore that Staffordshire Police was not entitled to refuse to comply with it under section 14(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires Staffordshire Police to issue a fresh response to the request, which does not rely on section 14(1).
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Staffordshire Police
11 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the purchase of the ‘Mountbatten Papers’[1]. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Arts Council has correctly applied section 44(1)(a) 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 44
View Arts Council England
11 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to civil court proceedings with a specific case reference number. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) neither confirmed nor denied holding the information requested at part D of the request, citing sections 32(3) (court records) and 40(5) (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner has considered the MoJ’s application of section 32(3) 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 32
View Ministry of Justice
10 Apr 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the policing of two football matches between Grimsby Town FC and Stevenage FC. Hertfordshire Constabulary disclosed some information and withheld the remainder under the exemptions at section 31 (law enforcement) and section 40(2) (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Hertfordshire Constabulary was entitled rely on section 31 to refuse the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Hertfordshire Constabulary
10 Apr 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information with regards to complaints Cumbria County Council (the council) had received. The council provided some information and advised other information requested was not held. During the Commissioner’s investigation, the council amended its response to part of the request from ‘not held’ to instead rely on section 12 of the FOIA to refuse to respond. The complainant was not satisfied with the council’s section 12 refusal and the time it took to refuse it. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council is able to rely on section 12 of the FOIA but has breached section 17(5) of the FOIA in issuing the refusal notice outside the required timeframe. As the council has now issued its refusal, the Commissioner does not require it to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 17
View Cumbria County Council
10 Apr 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the minutes of the Honours and Decorations Committee concerning discussions and decisions regarding the ‘Medals Review’. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office has correctly engaged the exemptions at sections 35(1)(a) and 37(1)(b) but she considers that the public interest in disclosure outweighs the public interest in maintaining the exemptions. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the requested information with limited redaction in accordance with paragraph 39 of this notice. 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. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35; FOI 37
View Cabinet Office