23 Jan 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Cabinet Office for a copy of a closed file, PREM 19/1828, which concerned UK relations with Libya following the shooting of WPC Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan People’s Bureau in 12 April 1984. The Cabinet Office sought to withhold this information on the basis of the exemptions contained at sections 26(1) (defence), 27(1) and 27(2) (international relations), 41(1) (information provided in confidence), 38(1)(b) (health and safety) and 40(2) (personal data) of FOIA. The Cabinet Office also sought to rely on sections 23(5) (security bodies) and section 24(2) (national security) to refuse to confirm or deny whether it holds any further information. The Commissioner is satisfied that the withheld information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of sections 27(1)(a), (c) and (d). However, she has also concluded that sections 23(5) and 24(2) cannot be relied on in this case.
Exemptions cited: FOI 23; FOI 24; FOI 27
View Cabinet Office
23 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a request to the Cabinet Office for a copy of a ‘DPA Breach Notification Form’ it submitted to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). The Cabinet Office refused the request under section 31(1)(g) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) and that the balance of the public interest favoured maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office is entitled to refuse the request under section 31(1)(g) of the Act. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Cabinet Office
23 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information about call-in requests to DCLG. The Commissioner’s decision is that DCLG did not provide the information requested within the statutory timeframe of 20 working days and has therefore breached Regulation 5(2) of the EIR. It also failed to issue a refusal notice within the statutory timeframe of 20 working days and has therefore breached Regulation 14(2) of the EIR. As both a response and a refusal notice have now been issued, the Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 14(2)(1); EIR 5(2)
View Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
23 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Kettering General Hospital NHS Trust (“the Trust”) relating to the public selection and recruitment process for the Senior ICT Trainer role including how many candidates applied for the position and the shortlist criteria and scores. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within 20 working days of receipt. As a response has now been provided, the Commissioner requires the Trust to take no steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Kettering General Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
23 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) for information about how the UK voted in a particular UN election. The FCO withheld this information on the basis of sections 27(1)(a) and (d) (international relations) of FOIA. The Commissioner is satisfied that the withheld information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of these exemptions and that in all the circumstances of the case the public interest favours withholding the requested information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 27
23 Jan 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested statistical information from OCR in relation to the malpractice cases reported to it over a five year period. OCR refused to disclose this information citing sections 12, 21 and 43 of the FOIA. In relation to section 12 of the FOIA, the Commissioner has decided that OCR applied this exemption appropriately to the fifth element of the complainant’s request. However, in relation to elements one to four, the Commissioner has decided that OCR was incorrect to rely on sections 21 and 43 of the FOIA. She therefore requires OCR to disclose elements one to four of the request to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 21; FOI 43
23 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested costing information relating to planning applications relating to a specific address. The Commissioner’s decision is that Lancaster City Council (“the Council”) has correctly applied section 1 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Lancaster City Council
22 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted two requests to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). The FCO failed to respond to these requests within 20 working days and therefore breached section 10(1) of FOIA. As the FCO has now responded to the complainant’s second request, which essentially sought the same information as the complainant’s first request, no steps are required by this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
22 Jan 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to erasure from the register, suspensions and conditions placed upon practice. The NMC refused to disclose the information requested at part 1 of the request under section 40(2) FOIA. It refused to comply with parts 2 and 3 of the request under section 12 FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the NMC was correct to apply section 12 FOIA and that it was not therefore obliged to comply with the request in its entirety. It did not however provide the complainant with appropriate advice and assistance in accordance with its obligations under section 16 FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take provide the complainant with advice and assistance in accordance with the NMC’s obligations under section 16 FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View NMC
22 Jan 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a Memorandum of Understanding, dated 7 October 2015, from St Thomas More Catholic Primary School, Eltham (“the School”). The School provided part of the document, but redacted in full the section entitled Financial Responsibility under section 40(2) of the FOIA – Third party personal data. The Commissioner’s decision is that only some of the information has been correctly withheld under the exemption. The School has correctly withheld some specific salary information, but the remainder of the section either does not comprise third party personal data, or may fairly be disclosed without breaching any principle of the Data Protection Act 1998. The Commissioner requires the School to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the section entitled Financial Responsibility to the complainant, apart from the four amounts of money which are specified since these relate to specific salary information, as detailed in this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View ST. THOMAS MORE CATHOLIC PRIMARY SCHOOL
22 Jan 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from St Thomas More Catholic Primary School, Eltham (“the School”) relating to a Memorandum of Understanding. Some information was provided within the scope of the request, but the School withheld sections from three sets of minutes of meetings of the School’s Governing Body. The Commissioner’s decision is that the School has correctly withheld this information under section 36(2) of the FOIA – Prejudicial to the effective conduct of public affairs. In addition, some items from the Costs column of the School Action Plan, which fell within the scope of the request, were withheld. The Commissioner’s decision is that the school correctly withheld some of these items under section 40(2) of the FOIA – Third party personal data – and correctly withheld one item under section 43(2) – Commercial interests. However, the Commissioner has determined that the disclosure of row 4.2 of the Costs column of the School Action Plan for the academic year 2015-201
Exemptions cited: FOI 36; FOI 40; FOI 43
View ST. THOMAS MORE CATHOLIC PRIMARY SCHOOL
22 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has asked the Department for Communities and Local Government (“the DCLG”) for information contained in Continuous Recording of Social Housing Lettings and Sales (“CORE”) database, including details of the local authorities where the properties located. The Commissioner has established that the information contained in the CORE database, to the level required by the complainant, is normally made available to the public under special licence for non-commercial purposes. The DCLG determined that the complainant would be unable to obtain a special licence enabling her to access the information she seeks and therefore it has refused her request in reliance on section 40(2) and 41(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Department for Communities and Local Government has correctly applied section 40(2) to the contents of the CORE database. She has not found it necessary to consider the DCLG’s additional application of section 41(1).
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
22 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to how many allegations have been made against BBC employees or contributors which contain an element of sexual harassment and/or inappropriate sexual behaviour. The BBC has failed to respond to this request.
The Commissioner considers that the BBC 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 FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View BBC
22 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request the Cabinet Office seeking a range of data about pension payments and payments made under the Civil Service Compensation Scheme. The Cabinet Office responded by stating that it is does not hold any of the requested information. The Commissioner is satisfied that on the balance of probabilities that the Cabinet Office does not hold information falling within the scope of the request. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0128 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Cabinet Office
22 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Cheddington Combined School the YouTube link of a video that was shown during a history class and further detailed information in relation to the content of that video. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the School does not hold information further to that already provided. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
18 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant asked Warwick District Council for the cost of the G L Hearn Ltd Hotel Study on St. Mary’s Lands issued in March 2017. The Commissioner finds that the Council provided the complainant with the information she asked for and therefore she has decided that the Council has complied with section 1 of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Warwick District Council
18 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a freedom of information request to the East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundations Trust for information related to the death of his daughter at the William Harvey Hospital. The Trust refused the request under the section 40(2) (personal information) and section 30(1) (investigations) exemptions. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the Trust said that it was now seeking to rely on section 14(1) in the first instance on the grounds that the request was vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust correctly applied section 14(1) to refuse the complainant’s request and she requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust
18 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to private equity funds from the City of Wolverhampton Council (“the council”). The council provided some information but said that it did not hold some of the information. The complainant disputed this position. During the Commissioner’s investigation, the council highlighted that due to the passage of time, figures sought by the complainant were now available and had been published online. At this point, the complainant said that he did not accept that the council had provided all the information he had requested and clarified the scope of his complaint. The council acknowledged that it did hold the further information sought however it said that it would be too burdensome to provide it all at once and that it was to be published as part of an ongoing publication schedule. The council confirmed that it would wish to rely on the exemption under section 22 of the FOIA. The Commissioner has found breaches of section 1(1)(a), 10(1), 17(1) an
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 17
View Wolverhampton City Council
18 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant’s request consisted of 20 questions relating to paramedics’ pay arrangements. East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust (the Trust) provided a response to questions 1, 2, 3, 6, 13, 15, 18, 19 and 20. However, it refused to answer questions 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16 and 17, citing section 14(1). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust was not entitled to refuse to answer questions 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16 and 17 of the request under section 14(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to issue a fresh response to questions 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16 and 17 of the request which does not rely on section 14(1) of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust
18 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested unredacted financial data sheets for the proposed regeneration of Cressingham Gardens. London Borough of Lambeth Council (“the Council”) refused the request on the basis of the exception at regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the regulation 12(5)(e) exception is engaged and the public interest favours maintaining the exception and withholding the information. She requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e)
View London Borough of Lambeth
18 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about a local right of way. Surrey County Council (‘the Council’) denies holding the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to refuse to provide the requested information under regulation 12(4)(a) of the EIR because, on the balance of probabilities, it does not hold the information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
View Surrey County Council
18 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested minutes and any other material concerning particular meetings with Monitor. NHS Improvement (NHSI) has released some information and says that information it has withheld is exempt from release under section 40(2) of the FOIA (third person personal data). The Commissioner’s decision is that the withheld information is exempt from release under section 40(2). The Commissioner does not require NHSI to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0094 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View NHS England
18 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about a specified court case. The Ministry of Justice (the ‘MOJ’) refused to confirm or deny whether it held the requested information by virtue of sections 40(5) personal information and 32(3) court records of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that MOJ has applied section 40(5)(a) of the FOIA appropriately. She does not require the MOJ to take any further steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Ministry of Justice
18 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
18 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from the Ministry of Justice, information on people recalled to HMP Hull for breaking their licences. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Ministry of Justice has breached Sections 1 and 10 of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within 20 working days of receipt. The Commissioner requires the Ministry of Justice to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Respond to the complainant’s refined request dated 20 September 2017 in accordance with the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Ministry of Justice
17 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council’s involvement with the Syrian Vulnerable Person’s Resettlement Scheme. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Home Office must issue a response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA. The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
17 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding the number of people in certain categories that were detained at border points of entry in the years 2014/15 and 2015/16. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Home Office must issue a response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
17 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding escapes from Immigration Removal Centre’s. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to the request within the reasonable timeframe specified by section 10(3). The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Home Office must issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
17 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding contractual agreements and emails between the Home Office and G4S/Serco about people in detention being used as employees. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Home Office must issue a response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA. The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
17 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to the request within the reasonable timeframe specified by section 10(3). The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Home Office must issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
17 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding Rule 35 reports and detainees being released or detention maintained. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to the request within the reasonable timeframe specified by section 10(3). The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Home Office must issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA. The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
17 Jan 2018Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on the guidance provided to doctors in respect of treating patients who may have suffered sexual abuse. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) originally denied holding the information. At the internal review stage the DH confirmed the information was held but refused the request under section 21 – information reasonably accessible to the applicant, and provided the complainant with links to where the information could be accessed on the internet. Unfortunately the links did not work and ultimately the DHSC provided the complainant with electronic copies of the documents it held. Inevitably this was outside the 20 working days for responding to requests. The Commissioner’s decision is that DHSC breached section 10 by failing to provide the requested information within 20 working days. By failing to issue a refusal notice in respect of the exemption it was relying on at the time of the internal review within 20 working days of receipt o
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 17
View Department of Health and Social Care
17 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of a number of reports produced by the Extremism Analysis Unit. The Home Office refused this request, citing the exemption provided by section 35(1)(a) (formulation or development of government policy) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office cited section 35(1)(a) correctly and so it was not obliged to disclose the requested information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35
View Home Office
17 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding detainees in Immigration Removal Centre’s and crimes they have committed. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to the request within the reasonable timeframe specified by section 10(3). The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Home Office must issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
17 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding visa applications from outside the UK made in January, February and March 2017. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Home Office must issue a response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA. The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
17 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding complaints made in Immigration Removal Centre’s (IRC’s). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to the request within the reasonable timeframe specified by section 10(3). The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Home Office must issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA. The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
17 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made requests for costs incurred by the local authority relating to the policy on street trading licences. The Royal Borough of Greenwich (the Council) refused the request as vexatious under section 14(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied the vexatious provision at section 14(1) of the FOIA. She does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Royal Borough of Greenwich
17 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from Leicester City Council that relates to a topographical plan for Millstone Lane and an item mentioned in a document previously provided to the complainant, titled “Jubilee Square Consultation – Stage 2 Concept Design”. The Council refused to comply with the request as it considered it to be vexatious under section 14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act and regulation 12(4)(b) of the Environmental Information Regulations.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
View Leicester City Council
17 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding charter flights and food ad fluid refusals in immigration removal centres. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to the request within the reasonable timeframe specified by section 10(3). The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Home Office must issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA. The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Home Office
17 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the voting on delegated commissioning. North West London Collaboration of Clinical Commissioning Groups (the CCG) provided most of the information within the scope of the request but refused to provide the remainder, citing the exemption in sections 41 of the FOIA. The Information Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is exempt from disclosure by virtue of section 41 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0037 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41
View NHS South West London Clinical Commissioning Group
16 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to a planning application for development in West Bay, Botley. She specifically asked for information regarding viability submissions. The council supplied some redacted information and said that the exception under regulation 12(5)(e) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (“the EIR”) applied. This exception concerns commercially sensitive information. It said that the public interest did not favour disclosure. The complainant asked the Commissioner to consider whether the council had correctly withheld the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that insufficient evidence was supplied to support the use of the exception and the Commissioner has therefore found that regulation 12(5)(e) was not engaged. The Commissioner has found breaches of regulations 5(1) and 5(2) of the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2)
View Vale of White Horse District Council
16 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information showing authorisation under section 2 of General Products Safety Regulations 2005 for those authorised to assist the authority in carrying out its functions under or for the purposes of the enforcement of these Regulations and safety notices. The council refused to disclose the information citing the exemption under section 31 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (prevention of prejudice to law enforcement). The Commissioner’s decision is that insufficient evidence has been supplied to support the use of this exemption and she therefore does not consider that this exemption was engaged. The Commissioner has found breaches of section 1(1)(b) and 10(1) of the FOIA. The council is required to disclose the withheld information to the complainant within 35 days.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 31
View Cheshire East Council
16 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested planning, and related information, regarding specific addresses. The Commissioner’s decision is that Vale of White Horse District Council does not hold any further information relevant to the requests. She does not require any steps to be taken to ensure compliance with the legislation. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0019 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1)
View Vale of White Horse District Council
15 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) about its structure and policies. FOS has refused to comply with the requests which it says are vexatious under section 14(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the complainant’s requests can be categorised as vexatious under section 14(1) and FOS is not obliged to comply with them. The Commissioner does not require FOS to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
15 Jan 2018Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
Summary wording for website: The complainant has requested information about road construction and maintenance, and traffic incidents, on a particular street in particular years. London Borough of Islington Council (‘the Council’) released some information and its position, which the complainant disputes, is that it holds no further relevant information. The Commissioner’s decision is that: The Council has breached section 1(1) of the FOIA because it has not communicated to the complainant all the information it holds that falls within the scope of his request. The Council also breached section 10(1) as it did not comply with section 1(1) within the required timescale. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Release to the complainant any remaining information missing from the information it released to him on 15 February 2017. Carry out further searches for information falling within the scope of the request and, if
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Islington Council
15 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant asked the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”) to confirm or deny whether it was conducting, or intending to conduct, a particular investigation. The MPS would neither confirm nor deny any such investigation citing the exemptions at section 30(3) (investigations and proceedings) and 40(5)(b)(i) (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that it was entitled to rely on section 40(5)(b)(i) to neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation; she did not therefore consider the citing of section 30(3). No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Metropolitan Police Service
15 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested various information in respect of the tenancy record of an individual living at a specified property within Pembrokeshire County Council’s boundaries. Pembrokeshire County Council refused to provide the requested information citing section 40(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Pembrokeshire County Council has correctly relied on section 40(2) to refuse the information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Pembrokeshire County Council
15 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a sample document from the Department for Work and Pensions (“the DWP”) which relates to entitlement to Employment and Support Allowance. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the DWP does not hold any information which falls within the scope of the request other than a sample letter “ESA125” which had previously been provided to the complainant. The Commissioner does not require the DWP to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Department for Work and Pensions
15 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested data relating to ‘lessons learned’ within the Home Office. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has correctly applied section 12 of the FOIA to the request, and has also provided the complainant with advice and assistance in accordance with section 16 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Home Office
15 Jan 2018Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about prisoner recalls in relation to Parole Board hearings. The Ministry of Justice (the ‘MOJ’) refused to provide the requested information, citing section 40(2), the exemption for personal information, of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOJ was entitled to rely on section 40(2) of FOIA to refuse this request. She does not require the MOJ to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Ministry of Justice