19 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding the Syrian vulnerable persons relocation 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. 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 Home Office
19 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding the extension to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act aka “Snoopers Charter”. 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. 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 Home Office
19 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding the previous work experience of a named individual employed by Hertfordshire Constabulary. Hertfordshire Constabulary responded by refusing to confirm or deny whether it held the requested information under Section 40(5) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Hertfordshire Constabulary has correctly applied Section 40(5) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Hertfordshire Constabulary
19 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the Independent Police Complaints Commission information regarding the previous experience of its casework and investigations staff in the Criminal Investigations, Scientific and Forensic Departments of any police constabulary. The Independent Police Complainants Commission refused the request on the basis that compliance would exceed the prescribed limit under Section 12 of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Independent Police Complaints Commission has successfully applied Section 12 of the FOIA and also that it has not breached Section 16 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Independent Office for Police Conduct
19 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding the cost of charter operations. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(3) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to this request within a reasonable timeframe. 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. 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 Home Office
19 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding people refused citizenship for being ‘not of good character’ in 2016. 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. 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 Home Office
19 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding policies and information around fee-paid Entry Clearance Officer re-applying for posts they already hold. 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. 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 Home Office
19 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding deaths of immigration detainees in UK detention centres. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(3) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to this request within a reasonable timeframe. 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. 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 Home Office
19 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to a phone call he believes took place in 2009 between the then Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, and the then Lord Chancellor/Secretary of State for Justice, Jack Straw regarding youth sentencing. He also asked for information about certain decisions subsequently made in respect of youth sentencing policy. The Ministry of Justice (“the MoJ”) said that it did not hold most of the information described in the request. It withheld information about youth sentencing policy, citing the exemption at section 36(2)(b)(ii) (inhibition to the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the MoJ did not hold most of the requested information. The Commissioner also found that the MoJ was entitled to rely on section 36(2)(b)(ii) to withhold the information that it did hold. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 36
View Ministry of Justice
19 Sep 2017Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant made a request to Manchester City Council (‘the Council’) for all public responses to the St Michaels planning application. The Council refused to comply with the request under regulation 12(4)(b) EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied regulation 12(4)(b) EIR to the request. It also complied with regulation 9 in the handling of this request. The Commissioner notes that the Council provided its response outside of the statutory twenty working days and has therefore breached regulation 14(2) of the EIR. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b); EIR 14(2)(1)
View Manchester City Council
19 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from London Borough of Sutton (“the Council”) in relation to an Executive meeting held in 2011. The Council provided some of the requested information, however it withheld part of the information (“the withheld information”). The Council cited sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) of the FOIA as a basis for non-disclosure. The Commissioner’s decision is that sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) of the FOIA are engaged in relation to the specific withheld information, however the public interest in disclosure of the information outweigh that in maintaining the exemptions in all the circumstances of the case. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: to disclose to the complainant the information previously withheld under sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36
View London Borough of Sutton
19 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to the surrender of a lease by the county council to the Parish Council. The council initially responded providing some information and applying Regulation 12((4)(d) to the information however it subsequently applied section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious requests). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has not correct to apply section 14 to the information as it is environmental information and should therefore have been considered under the EIR. The Commissioner has decided however that Regulation 12(4)(b) (manifestly unreasonable) does apply to the information for the same reasons outlined by the council for section 14(1) of FOIA applying. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
19 Sep 2017Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to an application to extinguish a right of way. The council provided some information however it applied section 12(4)(d) to other information. During the course of the investigation the council withdrew its reliance upon Regulation 12(4)(d) and provided further information to the complainant. It also applied Regulation 13 to withhold the identities of individuals from the information. The complainant considers that further information must be held, that the council was incorrect to apply Regulation 13 and that the council failed to comply with the time requirements of Regulation 5(2) when responding to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that on a balance of probabilities the council had provided all of the information which it holds to the complainant. She has however decided that it was not correct to apply Regulation 13 to the names of the applicant but that it was correct to apply it to the identity of council officers fro
Exemptions cited: EIR 11; EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 13; EIR 5(2)
View Lancashire County Council
19 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding the number of people given temporary admission into the UK from June 2013 to May 2016. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust 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. 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 Home Office
19 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding the service level performance of queueing at Stanstead Airport Passport Control. 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. 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 Home Office
19 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding statistics/intelligence in relation to concerns raised for children and adults at risk across airports in London. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(3) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to this request within a reasonable timeframe. 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. 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 Home Office
19 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding the previous work experience of a named individual employed by the Independent Police Complaints Commission. The Independent Police Complaints Commission responded by refusing to confirm or deny whether it held the requested information under Section 40(5) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Independent Police Complaints Commission has correctly applied Section 40(5) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Independent Office for Police Conduct
19 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding certified immigration decisions. 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. 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 Home Office
19 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Home Office regarding correspondence between any Lancashire business and the Home Office relating to anti-fracking protests near Preston and any resulting correspondence between the Home Office and Lancashire Police. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached section 10(3) of the FOIA as it has failed to give a substantive response to this request within a reasonable timeframe. 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. 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 Home Office
18 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested various items of information including dates of disputes between two specified properties. Caerphilly County Borough Council refused to neither confirm nor deny whether it held relevant information citing section 40(5)(b)(i) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Caerphilly County Borough Council has correctly relied on section 40(5)(b)(i) to neither confirm or deny whether it holds relevant information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2017/0237 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Caerphilly County Borough Council
18 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information on self-managed allotment rent increases. The Sefton Council (the Council) confirmed that they did not hold any further information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council does not hold any further information in this case. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Sefton Council
18 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from Shepway District Council (“the Council”) about a planning application relating to land at Princes Parade. The Council informed the complainant that it did not hold some of the requested information, and refused to provide the remainder, citing EIR Regulations 12(4)(d) – material in the course of completion, 12(5)(d) – confidentiality of proceedings and 12(5)(e) – confidentiality of commercial or industrial information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on Regulation 12(5)(d) for that information within the scope of the request which is withheld. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(d)
18 Sep 2017Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant asked Devon County Council for a copy of a contract between the Council and Babcock Learning and Development Partnership (“Babcock LDP”), including information concerning the Key Performance Indicators, monitoring of the contract, service specifications and the full financial values of the contract. The Council initially confirmed that it holds the information requested by the complainant but it refused to disclose this information on the grounds that it is commercially sensitive and subject to the exemption to disclosure provided by section 43 of the FOIA. The Council’s position was reversed at internal review and information was disclosed to the complainant via the Council’s website. The Commissioner’s decision is that Devon County Council has provided the complainant with the information she had requested and thereby it has satisfied section 1(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner has also decided that the Council has breached section 10 of the FOIA by failing to provide
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Devon County Council
18 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested log details of all incidents referring to two named properties. Gwent Police would neither confirm nor deny whether it held relevant information citing section 40(5)(b)(i) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Gwent Police has correctly relied on section 40(5)(b)(i) to neither confirm nor deny whether it holds relevant information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Gwent Police
18 Sep 2017Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to refusals of UK citizenship applications for applicants failing the good character requirement. The Home Office provided some information but did not comply with the rest of the request, citing section 12 (cost limits) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has applied section 12 of FOIA appropriately. However, the Commissioner considers that the Home Office has breached sections 21 (information accessible by other means), 10 (time for compliance) and 17 (request for information) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the Home Office to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 12; FOI 17; FOI 21
View Home Office
18 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the original receipts for Welsh Government procurement cards for the purposes of an article reported in Wales Online showing that £1.4 million was spent on 237 active cards in the financial year 2015 to 2016. The Welsh Assembly Government refused the request on the basis of section 12 of the FOIA, inviting her to refine it. The Welsh Government subsequently refused the refined request on the same basis. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Welsh Government in failing to provide appropriate advice and assistance in its response to both the original and refined requests, has breached section 16 of the FOIA, and based on the information provided to date regarding its record held centrally, the Welsh Government cannot rely on section 12 in respect of the complainant’s refined request. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Provide suitable help and assistance as prescribed by sec
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Welsh Government
14 Sep 2017Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to planning applications. Forest of Dean Borough Council refused the request, withholding the information under the exception for adverse affect to the course of justice – regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that Forest of Dean District Council failed to conduct an internal review within the time limit in breach of regulation 11(4), and correctly applied regulation 12(5)(b) to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(5)(b)
View Forest of Dean District Council
14 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about parcel operators. Ofcom withheld the information under section 44 of the FOIA (prohibitions on disclosure). During the Commissioner’s investigation, although it maintained its position that it had correctly applied section 44(1)(a) to the request, Ofcom voluntarily released the requested information to the complainant. The Commissioner’s decision is that Ofcom was entitled to rely on section 44(1)(a) when it originally withheld the disputed information. The Commissioner does not require Ofcom to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 44
View Ofcom
14 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of the Transformation Quality Improvement Officer (TQIO) and the school improvement Partner (SIP) reports held by Kirklees Council (council) for a particular school which covered a specified time period. The council refused the request under the exemption covering vexatious requests-section 14(1). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has correctly applied section 14(1). The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2017/0231 dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Kirklees Metropolitan Council
14 Sep 2017Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information held by Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council (the council) on the future of the Estate Management Scheme (EMS). The council provided some information but withheld the remainder relying on regulations 12(4)(d), 12(4)(e), 12(5)(b), 13 and 5(3). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has correctly identified all the information held within the scope of the request, and has therefore complied with regulation 5(1). She has also decided that the council has correctly applied the exceptions at regulations 12(4)(d), 12(5)(b), 13 and 5(3). However, with regard to the application of regulation 12(4)(e), the Commissioner’s decision is that for the most part, the council has applied the exception correctly, but there are a small number of documents to which regulation 12(4)(e) has been claimed and to which it does not apply, and the council has therefore breached the EIR in respect of these.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 12(4)(e); EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 13; EIR 5(1); EIR 5(3)
View Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council
14 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant submitted a request to the public authority for a copy of the financial viability assessment undertaken on a piece of land purchased by the public authority. The public authority disclosed most of the financial viability assessment. It withheld the remaining information within the scope of the request in reliance on the exception at regulation 12(5)(e) EIR. The Commissioner has concluded that the public authority was not entitled to rely on the exception at regulation 12(5)(e). Information Tribunal appeal EA/2017/0240 appeal disposed of by consent order.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e)
14 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to care plans for elderly people in the Appleby area. The Council failed to respond within the statutory 20 working days prescribed by FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it did not respond to the request within the timescale for compliance. As a response has now been provided, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Cumbria County Council
14 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the acknowledgement of racism and racist acts allegedly made by a specific Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Director. The Commissioner’s decision is that Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council has correctly applied the exemption for third party personal data at section 40(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Doncaster Council
14 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested risk assessments carried out by Whirlpool relating to a modification programme of tumble dryers that have been shared with Peterborough Trading Standards. The Commissioner’s decision is that Peterborough City Council has incorrectly applied the exemption for information provided in confidence at section 41 of the FOIA. She has also decided that Peterborough City Council has incorrectly applied the exemption for commercial interests at section 43(2) of the FOIA and the exemption for the law enforcement at section31(1)(g) of the FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31; FOI 41; FOI 43
View Peterborough City Council
13 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to Council Tax liability hearings. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) refused the request under the criteria for section 17(6) of the FOIA (refusal of request). The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was vexatious and the MoJ was entitled to apply section 14(1) of the FOIA (vexatious request) to refuse the request. She also considers that the MoJ was not obliged to issue a refusal notice in respect of the request, in accordance with section 17(6) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14; FOI 17
View Ministry of Justice
13 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested the name of an individual who raised a complaint on behalf of the Chapel-en-le-Frith Parish Council to the High Peak Borough Council’s planning enforcement officer. The complaint was regarding a potential planning control breach in relation to an unauthorised development. The High Peak Borough Council sought to withhold the name of the data subject using the exception in regulation 13 of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the High Peak Borough Council incorrectly applied the exception at regulation 13(1) of the EIR to the withheld information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the withheld information to the complainant within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13(1)
View High Peak Borough Council
13 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the lawfulness, or otherwise, of Bulking Centres and Council Tax Liability hearings. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request is vexatious and the MoJ was entitled to apply section 14(1) of the FOIA to refuse the request. She also considers that the MoJ was not obliged to issue a refusal notice in respect of the request, in accordance with section 17(6) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14; FOI 17
View Ministry of Justice
13 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to a specific Council Tax Liability hearing. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) refused the request under the criteria for section 17(6) of the FOIA (refusal of request). The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was vexatious and the MoJ was entitled to apply section 14(1) of the FOIA (vexatious request) to refuse the request. She also considers that the MoJ was not obliged to issue a refusal notice in respect of the request, in accordance with section 17(6) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14; FOI 17
View Ministry of Justice
13 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information held by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) relating to the decision to give Justices of the Supreme Court the courtesy title of Lord/Lady. The MoJ confirmed it held some relevant information but withheld it on the basis of section 37(1) of the FOIA (Communications with Her Majesty, etc. and honours). The Commissioner’s decision is that the section 37(1)(a) exemption (communications with the Sovereign) is engaged in respect of the withheld information. She requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal EA/2017/0223 allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 37
View Ministry of Justice
13 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Ministry of Defence (MOD) regarding a grievance he had brought against the MOD. The Commissioner has established that the MOD did not reply to the complainant’s request on the grounds that it is vexatious and subject to the MOD’s application of section 17(6) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOD is entitled to rely on section 17(6) of the FOIA and is therefore not obliged to reply to the complainant’s request. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any further steps. Information Tribunal appeal GIA/1848/2018 PTA refused.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14; FOI 17
View Ministry of Defence
13 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested correspondence relating to a planning application. Sedgemoor District Council (the Council) refused the request under section 14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) as it was vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request is vexatious. However, she finds that the Council should have refused the request under regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR instead of section 14(1) of the Act, as the request was for environmental information. The Commissioner finds that the balance of the public interest test favours maintaining the exception. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken for the Council to be compliant with the relevant legislation. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
View Sedgemoor District Council
13 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a copy of a report and any surrounding correspondence relating to a Victoria Cross medal. The National Army Museum (NAM) denied holding the relevant information, and also refused the request as vexatious under section 14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act). The Commissioner’s decision is that the complainant’s request is vexatious as per section 14(1) of the Act. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View National Army Museum
13 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from Shepway District Council (“the Council”) about a planning application for a proposed holiday lodge development on land at Little Densole Farm. The Council provided some information but refused to provide the remainder citing EIR regulation 12(5)(e) – confidentiality of commercial or industrial information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(e) for that information within the scope of the request which remains withheld. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e)
12 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on business (non-residential) property rates data from the council. The council applied section 31(1)(d) to withhold the information (prejudice to the assessment or collection of any tax or duty).The complainant argues that it was not correct to do so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to apply section 31(1)(d) to the information however the public interest in the disclosure of the information outweighs that in the exemption being maintained. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. To disclose the withheld information to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View West Oxfordshire District Council
12 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the Injury on Duty Benefit Regulations 2006. The Northern Ireland Policing Board refused the request under section 14(1) of the FOIA since it considered that request to be vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request is vexatious and the Policing Board was entitled to rely on section 14(1). No remedial steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Northern Ireland Policing Board
12 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to the Parish Council’s decision to recommend a refusal of a planning application to the East Hants District Council. The council said that it does not hold any records of the meeting which it has not already published however the complainant believes that information is likely to be held within the private email accounts of three Parish Council Councillors. The council said that it does hold some emails relating to the timing of a site meeting but that no other information is held. It did not however provide a copy of the emails it admitted it holds to the complainant nor claim any exemption for withholding this information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has failed to consider information which it has admitted it holds for disclosure to the complainant. She has also decided that, barring these emails, on a balance of probabilities the Parish Council was correct to state that no further information is held falling wit
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
12 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a freedom of information request to University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust for a copy of its draft Sustainability and Transformation plan which it sent to NHS England. The Trust refused the request under the exemptions in section 22 (information intended for future publication), section 41 (information provided in confidence) and section 43 (commercial interests). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust correctly applied the section 22 exemption and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 22
View University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust
12 Sep 2017Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested copies of maps showing all registered common land and town or village greens within the borough. The council refused to disclose this information citing section 21 of the FOIA. The Commissioner has decided that the request should have been considered under the EIR and, because the council has failed to respond to the complainant’s request for an internal review, it has breached regulation 11 of the EIR. The Commissioner therefore requires the council to issue its response in accordance with regulation 11 of the EIR to the complainant within 35 calendar days.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11
View London Borough of Hackney
12 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested planning information from Wokingham Borough Council (“the council”). The council provided information with some redactions made under section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“the FOIA”). The complainant alleged that more information was held, which the council denied. The Commissioner decided that the request should have been dealt with under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (“the EIR”). However, the Commissioner decided that no further information was held falling within the scope of the request. There are no steps to take.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1)
View Wokingham Council
11 Sep 2017Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted three requests to the Ministry of Defence (MOD) seeking information about the procurement of a particular contract. The MOD refused to answer requests on the basis that they were considered to be vexatious and further that given its previous correspondence with the complainant it was not under an obligation under section 17 of the FOIA to issue a formal refusal notice to the effect. The Commissioner has concluded that the requests are vexatious and therefore the MOD is not obliged, on the basis of section 14(1) of FOIA, to answer the requests. The Commissioner has also found that on basis of previous communications within the complainant the MOD was entitled to rely on the provisions contained at section 17(6) not to provide the complainant with a refusal notice stating that section 14(1) applied to his requests. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2017/0247 allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14; FOI 17
View Ministry of Defence