20 Jun 2025Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the waiting times of trolley patients (from decision to admit to admission) in Accident & Emergency from Mersey and West Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust (the Trust). The Trust refused to provide the requested information, applying section 12(1) FOIA – cost limit. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust applied section 12(1) correctly. The Commissioner also finds that the Trust did not breach section 16 FOIA. However, the Commissioner has decided that the Trust breached section 17(5) FOIA by not stating its reliance on section 12(1) within the statutory timeframe. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16(1); FOI 17(5)
View Mersey and West Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
20 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding consultations with the business community and the type of contact South Kesteven District Council (the Council) had with the Federation of Small Businesses. The Council relied on section 12 of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner also finds that the Council complied with its section 16 obligation to offer advice and assistance.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View South Kesteven District Council
20 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified under FOIA. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust
19 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the application of business rates. Oxford City Council (the Council) relied on section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious requests) to refuse the request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was vexatious and therefore the Council was entitled to rely upon section 14(1) of FOIA to refuse it.
The Commissioner does not require any steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0243 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View Oxford City Council
19 Jun 2025Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Chief Constable of Wiltshire Police (Wiltshire Police) for information in relation to a named hunt.
The Commissioner’s decision is that, for questions 1 – 3 of the request, on the balance of probabilities Wiltshire Police doesn’t hold the requested information, but it breached section 16 of FOIA (‘duty to provide advice and assistance’); for question 4, Wiltshire Police was correct to refuse to disclose the information it holds, on the basis of section 30(1)(a) of FOIA (‘investigations and proceedings conducted by public authorities’).
The Commissioner requires Wiltshire Police to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation:
• Provide the complainant with advice and assistance in relation to questions 1 – 3 of the request, in accordance with its obligations under section 16 of FOIA.
Wiltshire Police must take these steps within 30 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in th
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 16(1); FOI 30(1)(a)
19 Jun 2025Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the risk assessment for changes to the Northern Ireland Major Trauma Network. The Northern Ireland Ambulance Service Health and Social Care Trust (‘the Trust’) provided a copy of the Major Trauma Destination Protocol but stated that it did not hold the requested risk assessment. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Trust does not hold the requested risk assessment. However, the complainant’s request for an internal review also contained a fresh request for information which the Trust has failed to deal with. He finds that the Trust breached sections 1(1) and 10(1) of FOIA by failing to provide a response to either request within 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the Trust to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide a substantive response, to the request set out at paragraph 7 of this decision notice, in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
19 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
A public authority will breach section 10 of FOIA if it fails to respond to a request within 20 working days. Based on evidence available to the Commissioner, by the date of this notice the public authority has not issued a substantive response to this request. Therefore the Commissioner finds a breach of section 10. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The public authority must take this step within 30 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Swansea Council
19 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about Council for Sustainable Business meetings. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (‘Defra’) provided some of the requested information but relied on regulation 12(5)(f) of the EIR to withhold most of the content of the meeting notes. The Commissioner’s decision is that Defra was not entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(f) of the EIR to withhold some of the requested information. The Commissioner requires Defra to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the withheld information with appropriate redactions made to remove the personal information of junior officials.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(f)
19 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Police Service of Northern Ireland (“PSNI”) relating to online sexual offender prosecutions. The PSNI refused the request citing section 12(1) (cost of compliance) of FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the PSNI was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner also finds that the PSNI complied with its obligations under section 16 to offer advice and assistance.
The Commissioner does not require any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1)
View Police Service of Northern Ireland
19 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified under FOIA. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust
18 Jun 2025Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the cost of care provided to a specific address. The above public authority refused to confirm or deny that the information was held, eventually relying on section 41 of FOIA (breach of confidence) in order to do so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to rely on section 41 of FOIA to refuse to confirm or deny that the information was held. The public authority breached section 17 of FOIA as it failed to issue a refusal notice, citing all the exemptions on which it came to rely, within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 41
View NHS Herefordshire and Worcestershire ICB
18 Jun 2025Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about ministerial meetings with water companies. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (‘Defra’) originally relied on regulation 12(4)(e) of the EIR and regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR to withhold the requested information. Due to the passage of time, it later provided redacted copies of some of the requested information but relied on regulations 12(4)(e) and 12(5)(e) of the EIR as well as regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR and regulation 12(3) of the EIR to continue to withhold some of the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that Defra was entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(e) to withhold the readout for meeting (i). However, he finds that Defra was not entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(e) to withhold the redacted sections in the briefing note and readout for meeting (ii). The Commissioner requires Defra to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the withheld information i
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e)
18 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about pharmaceutical services. The above public authority relied on section 21 of FOIA (reasonably accessible) to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has correctly relied on section 21 of FOIA to withhold the information and, on the balance of probabilities, holds no further information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 21
View NHS England
18 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified under FOIA. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View The University of Cambridge
18 Jun 2025Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Mentmore Parish Council (the Council) about a third party having asked for the mowing contractor’s documentation. The Council stated that there was no information held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold the requested information. However, in not responding to the request to confirm that it did not hold the information within the statutory time limit, the Council breached section 1(1)(a) FOIA and section 10(1) FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10(1)
17 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of audio recordings of police interviews from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”). The MPS refused to provide the requested information citing sections 30(1)(a) ((Investigations and proceedings), 27(1)(a) and (c) (International relations) and 40(2) (Personal information) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MPS is entitled to rely on section 40(2) by virtue of 40(3A)(a). No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Metropolitan Police Service
17 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant submitted a request to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office seeking information about discussions it had held with Shell about its operations in the Niger Delta. The FCDO disclosed some information but redacted parts of this on the basis of regulations 13(1) (personal data), 12(5)(a) (international relations) and 12(5)(e) (commercial confidentiality) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FCDO has correctly applied these exemptions to withhold information in response to this request.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(a); EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 13(1)
17 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to Department for Business and Trade (DBT) seeking a copy of a report it had commissioned into National Investigation Service (NATIS). DBT disclosed a redacted version of the report with information being withheld on the basis section 31(1)(a) and (b) (law enforcement), 35(1)(a) (formulation or development of government policy), 40(2) (personal data), 41(1) (information provided in confidence) and section 43(2) (commercial interests of FOIA). The Commissioner’s decision is that the redacted information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of sections 31(1)(a) and (b) and the public interest favours maintaining each of the exemptions. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal FT/EA/2025/0236 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Department for Business and Trade
17 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested specific meeting minutes relating to the Building Regulations Advisory Committee. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government relied on section 12(1) of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MHCLG was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner also finds that the MHCLG complied with its section 16 obligation to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16
View Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
17 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to regeneration proposals. Plymouth City Council (the “Council”) disclosed some information and withheld other information under the exception for
commercial confidentiality (regulation 12(5)(e)). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to demonstrate that regulation 12(5)(e) is engaged and issued late responses, breaching regulation 5(2) and regulation 11(4). The Commissioner requires the Council to disclose the withheld information to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 5(2)
View Plymouth City Council
17 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from the Home Office, information about reports produced by the Research, Information and Communications Unit (RICU) and RICU staff. The Home Office refused to disclose the requested information, on the basis of section 24(1) of FOIA (‘national security’). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office was correct to rely on section 24(1). The Commissioner doesn’t require any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 24(1)
View Home Office
17 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of communications between Middlesbrough Council (the Council), Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and the Gambling Commission. The Council provided some information, and cited section 31 of FOIA to withhold the remaining information falling within the scope of the request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is not entitled to rely on section 31, as it has failed to demonstrate that the exemption is engaged.
The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation - Disclose the withheld information, with any personal data redacted under section 40(2) (personal information) as appropriate.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Middlesbrough Council
17 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about a building complaint. A public authority will breach section 10 of FOIA if it fails to respond to a request within 20 working days. Based on evidence available to the Commissioner, by the date of this notice the public authority has not issued a substantive response to this request. Therefore the Commissioner finds a breach of section 10, and requires the public authority to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Liverpool City Council
17 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the BBC about attendance at particular meetings where media coverage of the war in Ukraine was discussed. The BBC responded that the request was covered by the derogation and so was excluded from FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that, if held, the requested information would be held by the BBC for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and so isn’t covered by FOIA. He therefore upholds the BBC’s position and it’s not necessary for it to take any steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0291 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
View BBC
17 Jun 2025Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
In four requests, the complainant has requested information associated with complaints they submitted to North Cumbria Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust (‘the Trust’) about treatment they received. The Trust refused the requests as vexatious under section 14(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust was entitled to refuse the requests under section 14(1). The timeliness of its refusal didn’t comply with section 17(5) of FOIA, however.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1); FOI 17(5)
View North Cumbria Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust
17 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the Ministry of Defence seeking communications between certain dates exchanged by ‘MOD Civilian HR’ the Government Legal Department about a complaint which had been made to MOD Civilian HR. The MOD confirmed that it held information falling within the scope of the request but considered this to be exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 42 (legal professional privilege) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that information in the scope of the request is exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 42 and that in all the circumstances of the case the public interest favours withholding the information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 42
View Ministry of Defence
16 Jun 2025Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is, first, that the Office for National Statistics (ONS) is entitled to rely on section 41(1) of FOIA to withhold some of the correspondence that has been requested. Section 41 concerns information provided in confidence. Second, on the balance of probabilities the Commissioner finds that ONS holds no further information within scope of the request. However, it breached sections 1(1), 10(1) and 17(1) of FOIA as it didn’t communicate all the non-exempt information it holds, or issue a section 40(2) refusal notice, within 20 working days of the request. It’s not necessary for ONS to take any steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0288 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1); FOI 10(1); FOI 41(1); FOI 17(1)
View Office for National Statistics
16 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from Ofgem regarding an investigation it conducted into Drax. Ofgem refused to provide the information, applying regulations 12(5)(b)(course of justice), 12(5)(d)(confidentiality of proceedings) and 12(5)(e)(confidentiality of commercial or industrial information) of the EIR. It also explained that it did not hold some information (regulation 12(4)(a)). The Commissioner’s decision is that Ofgem applied regulation 12(5(b) of the EIR correctly and that the public interest favours maintaining the exception. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
View Office of Gas and Electricity Markets
16 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to legal advice given to Priti Patel, in her former capacity as Home Secretary, about the then proposed Rwanda asylum plan. The Home Office refused to provide the requested information, citing sections 27(1) (international relations) and 42(1) (legal professional privilege) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the withheld information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of sections 27(1) and 42(1) of FOIA. No steps are required as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 27; FOI 42
View Home Office
16 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested various information from Exeter City Council (the Council) in relation to restricted enclosures listed with the decision in relation to the relocation of the Green Space Team and Disposal of the existing Green Space Depot at Belle Isle. The Council initially refused the request in its entirety citing regulation 12(5)(e) (confidentiality of commercial or industrial information) of the EIR. Following an internal review, the Council provided a redacted copy of the report and appendix 1 and continued to rely on regulation 12(5)(e) to withhold appendix 2. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to refuse the remaining withheld information on the basis of regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e)
View Exeter City Council
16 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to meetings on carbon capture from the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ). The Commissioner’s decision is that DESNZ breached regulation 14(2) of the EIR as it failed to provide its refusal notice within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require DESNZ to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 14
View Department for Energy Security and Net Zero
16 Jun 2025Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a secured by design (SBD) assessment which has been carried out by Sussex Police for St Peter’s Health Centre and a copy of an email address to contact it. Sussex Police refused to provide a copy of the SBD assessment citing section 31(1)(a) of the FOIA (law enforcement). It provided the email address. The Commissioner’s decision is that Sussex Police was entitled to rely on section 31(1)(a) of FOIA to withhold the SBD assessment. The Commissioner also finds that, in providing a late response, Sussex Police breached sections 1(1) (general right of access) and 10(1) (time for compliance) of FOIA. No steps are required. First-tier tribunal (General Regulatory chamber) information rights appeal FT/EA/2025/0235 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 31(1)(a)
View Sussex Police
16 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified under FOIA. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Health and Safety Executive
16 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified under FOIA. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
16 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Liverpool City Council. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Liverpool City Council
16 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust (the Trust) information relating to employees accused, arrested or investigated for child sexual abuse. The Trust provided some information but withheld other information applying section 40(2) FOIA – personal information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has correctly relied on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust
13 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the destruction of information following the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) intervention with a specific organisation. The FCA refused the request under section 44 (prohibitions on disclosure) of FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the FCA was entitled to rely on section 44(1)(a) to withhold information in scope of the request.
The Commissioner does not require any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 44(1)
View Financial Conduct Authority
13 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about contracts and current fleet capacity. The above public authority provided most of the information, but refused to provide some. It relied separately on sections 24 (national security), 31 (law enforcement) and 43 (commercial interests) of FOIA to withhold information. The Commissioner’s decision is that none of the cited exemptions apply. The public authority also breached section 10 of FOIA as it failed to disclose the requested information within 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the information it has relied on sections 24, 31 or 43 of FOIA to withhold.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 24; FOI 31; FOI 43
View East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust
12 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) information about the Collateral group of companies which were placed into administration and in particular ‘Collateral Agent Limited.’ The FCA refused to comply with the request on the basis that it was vexatious under section 14(1) of FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to rely on section 14(1) of FOIA to refuse the request.
The Commissioner does not require any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Financial Conduct Authority
12 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the budget for staff development for the business school. The University of Westminster (‘the University’) disclosed information but also withheld information under section 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the University was correct to withhold the information it did. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43(2)
View The University of Westminster
11 Jun 2025Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested DfE to disclose details of any communications, correspondence or meetings between Lord Waheed Alli and Bridget Phillipson between 4 July 2024 and the date of their request. DfE confirmed that it does not hold any recorded information. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities DfE does not hold any recorded information. He has however recorded a breach of section 10 of FOIA, as it failed to respond to the request within 20 working days of receipt. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Department for Education
11 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made a request for information relating to the email addresses for policy officials and the process around surrogacy of a child. The Department of Health and Social Care (the DHSC) initially cited section 40(2) to refuse the request but later changed its reliance to section 14(1) of FOIA to refuse the request as vexatious.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to rely on section 14(1) of FOIA to refuse the request.
The Commissioner does not require any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View Department of Health and Social Care
11 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to payments and financial transactions made by the Post Office. Post Office Limited (Post Office) provided some information but withheld the remainder, citing sections 43(2) (commercial interests) and 21 (information accessible to
applicant by other means) of FOIA. The Commissioner investigated its application of section 43(2) to the small amount of information withheld by virtue of that exemption, information relating to insurance premiums. The Commissioner’s decision is that Post Office was entitled to rely on section 43(2) of FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43
View Post Office Ltd
11 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested copies of the restricted enclosures listed in respect of a decision on Exeter City Council’s (the Council) website in relation to land at Pendragon Road. The Council initially refused the request in its entirety citing regulation 12(5)(e) (confidentiality of commercial or industrial information) of the EIR. Following an internal review, the Council provided supporting documents and a redacted copy of the report. It continued to rely on regulation 12(5)(e) in respect of the redactions in the report. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has not demonstrated that regulation 12(5)(e) is engaged and was not therefore entitled to rely on the exception to withhold the remaining information. The Commissioner also finds that the Council breached regulation 11 of the EIR by failing to provide the outcome of its internal review within 40 working days. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11; EIR 12(5)(e)
View Exeter City Council
11 Jun 2025Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested presentation materials for a Home Office Security and Policing event. The Home Office refused the request, citing sections 23(1) (Information supplied by or relating to security bodies), 24(1) (National security), 31(1)(a), (b) and (c) (Law enforcement) and 40(2) (Personal information). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office was entitled to rely on sections 31(1)(a), (b) and (c), 23(1) and 40(2) to withhold some of the information specified in the request. However, he finds that most of the static slides and most of the transcript of a speech do not engage any of the cited exemptions. The Commissioner requires the Home Office to disclose the information which the Commissioner has identified does not engage the cited exemptions.
Exemptions cited: FOI 23; FOI 24; FOI 31; FOI 40
View Home Office
11 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about voting in the 2024 General Election. Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council stated that it did not hold this information for the purposes of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the information sought by the complainant is not held by the Council for the purposes of FOIA and that the Council is entitled to rely on section 3(2) (Information held by a public authority) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
View Blackburn with Darwen Council
11 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested communications involving Ofwat, the Environment Agency (EA) and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs about the interpretation of and enforcement of the Urban Waste Water Treatment (England and Wales) Regulations 1994 (UWWTR). Ofwat refused the request under regulation 12(5)(b) (the course of justice), regulation 12(5)(d) (confidentiality of proceedings) and regulation 12(4)(d) (material in the course of completion). The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has correctly applied regulation 12(5)(d) and that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exception. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(d)
View The Water Services Regulation Authority
11 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to a tenancy agreement. London Borough of Haringey (“the Council”) relied on section 40(2) of FOIA (third party personal information) to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has correctly relied on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Haringey Council
10 Jun 2025Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Department for Transport (DfT) information relating to Mersey Gateway Bridge Scheme. Dft provided some information and withheld the remaining information under section 43(2) (commercial interests) and section 22(1) (information intended for future publication) of FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that DfT was entitled to rely on sections 43(2) and 22(1) of FOIA to withhold the information requested. However, the Commissioner finds that DfT breached section 10(1) (time limits for compliance) of FOIA by not responding to the request within 20 working days.
The Commissioner does not require DfT to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 22; FOI 43(2)
View Department for Transport
10 Jun 2025Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified under FOIA. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Somerset Council