IC-359143-L6Q7: Irby upon Humber Parish Council
The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority breached section 10(1) of FOIA by failing to provide a response within 20 working days.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
Source · FOI / EIR decision notices
ICO FOI/EIR Decision Notices
Freedom of Information and Environmental Information Regulations decisions by the Information Commissioner.
26,238 total decisions
8,733 upheld (must disclose)
1,340 bodies covered
2005–2026 indexed date range
Filter decisions
IC-314580-P1L3: York City Council
The complainant has requested information relating to 5G infrastructure in the City of York region. The City of York Council (the council) stated that it did not hold the information.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the council does not hold the requested information. He also finds that the council breached regulation 11 of the EIR by failing to provide the internal review within 40 working days. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11; EIR 3
IC-344175-M3T6: Department For Environment, Food And Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
The complainant has requested copies of briefings and readouts from specific meetings with water companies. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (‘Defra’) provided redacted copies of the briefings, and relied on regulations 12(4)(e), 12(4)(d) and 12(5)(f) of the EIR to withhold the redacted information in the briefings and the readouts in their entirety. The Commissioner’s decision is that Defra was entitled to rely on regulations 12(4)(e) and 12(4)(d) of the EIR. However, he finds that the public interest favours disclosure of the requested information with the exception of all redactions in Annex F and two redactions in Annex D. He also finds that Defra was not entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(f) of the EIR. The Commissioner requires Defra to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the requested information with the exception of the redactions in Annex F and the first two redactions in Annex D.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 12(4)(e); EIR 12(5)(f)
IC-333149-N8Y3: Department for Education
The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information about school attendance orders is exempt information under section 40(2) of FOIA, which concerns personal data. It’s not necessary for the Department for Education to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
IC-341904-K4C9: Home Office
The complainant has requested information about workstream prioritisation between 2021-2023. The Home Office refused the request, citing section 12(1) (Cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the request. However, it failed to respond to the request within 20 working days, which was a breach of sections 1(1) and 10(1) of FOIA. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0092 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 12; FOI 16
IC-333278-G6S5: Office for Environmental Protection
The Commissioner’s decision is that Information Notices that the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) served on specific public authorities, those authorities’ responses, and information about an associated investigation is excepted from disclosure under regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. This exception concerns the course of justice. It’s not necessary for OEP to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b)
IC-338107-L4R7: The Pensions Regulator
The complainant has requested information relating to a specific pension fund. The Pensions Regulator (“the public authority”) refused to either confirm or deny that some of the requested information is held, citing section 44 (prohibitions on disclosure), and confirmed that the remaining information wasn’t held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, under section 44(2) of FOIA, the public authority was correct to refuse to either confirm or deny that some of the requested information was held. On the balance of probabilities, the public authority also doesn’t hold the information it denied holding so has fully complied with its obligations under section 1 (general right of access to information). However, the Commissioner has recorded a procedural breach of section 17 (refusal notice), since the public authority failed to cite, at refusal stage, the appropriate exemption it came to rely upon. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 44(2)
IC-350907-P4W6: Ministry of Justice
The complainant has requested information relating to allegations made by a named District Judge. The Ministry of Justice (“MOJ”) relied on section 40(5B) of FOIA (third party personal information) to refuse to confirm or deny that the information was held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOJ has correctly relied on section 40(5B) of FOIA to refuse to confirm or deny that the information was held. The MOJ breached section 10(1) of FOIA by failing to provide its initial response within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(5)(b)
IC-329516-C3Z3: Chief Constable Cumbria Constabulary
The complainant has requested information regarding an incident of a drone being shot down. Cumbria Constabulary provided some information within the scope of the request, relied on section 40(2) of FOIA (third party personal information) to withhold some information and denied holding any information within the scope of question 3. The Commissioner’s decision is that: Cumbria Constabulary has correctly relied on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold information relating to the data subject who shot the drone. Cumbria Constabulary was not entitled to rely on section 40(2) regarding information which relates to the drone pilot. Cumbria Constabulary breached section 10(1) by failing to respond within 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the information relating to the drone pilot (question 5) or issue an appropriate refusal notice which does not rely on section 40(2). Cumbria Constabula
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1); FOI 40(2)
IC-331874-R6H4: Humberside Police
The complainant has requested information about notifications made by the public authority to the National Police Chiefs’ Council (“NPCC”) national police freedom of information and data protection central referral unit (“NFPDU”).
The public authority (“the public authority”) informed the complainant that the number of referrals since September 2022 is zero.
The Commissioner’s decision is that no further information is held.
The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1)
IC-322522-Q2H7: Richmond upon Thames Council
The complainant has requested information relating to the London Community Equipment Consortium Framework Agreement. The London Borough of Richmond (“The Council”) relied on section 12 of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has not sufficiently demonstrated that section 12(1) is engaged.
The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
• Issue a fresh response to the request that does not rely on section 12(1) of FOIA.
The public authority must take these steps within 30 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 12(1)
IC-348438-B2K6: Metropolitan Police Service
The complainant has requested information about accidents on ‘A’ roads and speed cameras from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”). Ultimately, the complainant only complained about timeliness and the handling of his request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that in failing to respond to the request in a timely manner, the MPS breached sections 1 (General right of access) and 10 (Time for compliance) of FOIA. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
IC-337738-V9Y3: Greater Manchester Combined Authority
The complainant has requested a copy of a reply to a letter. The above public authority stated that it did not hold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probability, the public authority does not hold the requested information. The public authority’s handling of the request breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Keywords: child sexual abuse, Keir Starmer, Cyril Smith
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
IC-337931-G2M4: The Water Services Regulation Authority
The complainant has requested communications between Ofwat and other bodies on the interpretation and enforcement of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations 1995 (UWWTR).Ofwat refused the request as manifestly unreasonable under regulation 12(4)(b) EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the complainant’s request for is not manifestly unreasonable under regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR. The Commissioner requires Ofwat to provide the complainant with a fresh response to their request that doesn’t rely on regulation 12(4)(b).
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
IC-324757-F4S6: Waltham Forest Council
The complainant has requested all recorded information relating to a Planning Enforcement case (reference redacted). The London Borough of Waltham Forest (the Council) provided information held including photographs and stated that it did not hold any other information falling within scope of the request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold any additional information relevant to the request.
The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0107 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5
IC-353459-B4M2: Cumberland Council
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
IC-328102-W4T3: Corporate Officers of the House of Commons
The complainant submitted two requests to the House of Commons (HoC) seeking details of how reported incidents of stolen/lost IT equipment had been handled. The HoC disclosed some information in response to the request but withheld further information on the basis of sections 24(1) (national security), 31(1) (law enforcement) and 40(2) (personal data). The Commissioner’s decision is that withheld information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of sections 24(1) and 40(2) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 24; FOI 40
IC-332481-X0S2: Intellectual Property Office
The complainant submitted a request to the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) seeking information about a government announcement in 2022 to introduce a new copyright and database exception which would allow Text and Data Mining ‘for any purpose’. The IPO disclosed some information in response to the request but withheld further information on the basis of section 21 (information reasonably accessible by the applicant) , sections 27(1)(a) and (b) (international relations), section 35(1)(a) formulation or development of government policy), section 40(2) (personal data), section 41(1) (information provided in confidence) and section 42(1) (legal professional privilege). The Commissioner’s decision is that the exemptions cited provide a basis to withhold the requested information and that for the qualified exemptions the public interest favours maintaining these exemptions. However, only exception to this finding is in relation to the documents which have been withheld only on basis of se
Exemptions cited: FOI 27; FOI 35; FOI 40; FOI 41; FOI 42
IC-322764-K5W8: Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
The complainant has requested contract information from Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust). The Trust provided some information but withheld part of it, citing sections 43(2) – commercial interests and 40(2) – personal information as its reasons for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust cited section 40(2) correctly. He has decided that section 43(2) is engaged but that the public interest favours disclosure of part of the information the Trust has withheld. The Commissioner requires the Trust to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the business case (minus personal data) with the exception of the following parts -
FOI 43(2): Complaint partly upheld FOI 40(2): Complaint not upheld
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2); FOI 43(2)
IC-326207-K7K5: Detling Parish Council
The complainant has requested information about an alleyway. Detling Parish Council disclosed information in response. The complainant was dissatisfied with the Council’s response, on the basis that they believed further information to be held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has disclosed all held information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
IC-323839-T7X3: Mid Devon District Council
The complainant requested a copy of a report from Mid Devon District Council (“the Council”). The Council disclosed the majority of the report and some appendices during the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, however, it has continued to withhold some of the requested information, citing section 40(2) (personal data) and section 42 (legal professional privilege) of FOIA as its basis for doing so.
The Commissioner’s decision is that: The Council should have considered the request under the EIR rather than FOIA; The Council is entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(b) (course of justice) of the EIR to withhold the information it had withheld under section 42 (legal professional privilege) of FOIA; The Council is entitled to rely on regulation 13 (personal data) of the EIR to withhold some, but not all, of the information it had withheld under section 40(2) (personal data) of FOIA.
The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legi
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 13
IC-325321-W1Z7: IC-325321-W1Z7
The complainant has requested information from Torridge District Council (the Council) relating to impact analysis, human rights considerations and insurance policy information. The Commissioner’s decision is that for question 2 of the request, the Council, on the balance of probabilities, has not conducted adequate searches for the requested information. For question 3, the Commissioner is satisfied that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner also finds that the Council breached regulation 11 of the EIR as it failed to carry out its internal review within 40 working days. The Commissioner requires Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Conduct a fresh search and provide a new response for the information requested in question 2. The Council must take these steps within 30 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making writ
Exemptions cited: EIR 11; EIR 5
IC-338110-C0N2: Flintshire County Council
The council must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the EIR. The council must take this step within 30 calendar days of the date of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
IC-359089-K4D3: Rufford and Holmeswood Parish Council
The complainant requested information from Rufford and Holmeswood Parish Council for full annual accounts. 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
IC-323744-H0S6: Boreham Parish Council
The complainant requested information from Boreham Parish Council (“the Parish Council”) relating to a dog training business that operates on a recreation ground. The complainant believes that the Parish Council holds further information within the scope of parts four, five and six of the request, beyond that which it has already disclosed. However, the Parish Council’s position is that it has already disclosed all of the information it holds within the scope of these parts of the request (with the exception of a small amount of information redacted from one of the documents disclosed). The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Parish Council has not disclosed all of the information held within the scope of parts four, five and six of the request. The Commissioner requires the Parish Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the information that the Commissioner has determined is within scope of part six of t
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1)
IC-334904-V1F5: Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
The complainant has requested information about some medical equipment. The above public authority eventually provided the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority failed to comply with section 1(1) of FOIA within 20 working days because it failed to provide all the information it held. It therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
IC-333831-K7V3: Cornwall Council
The complainant requested information regarding how the Council had come into possession of a specific parcel of land. Cornwall Council (the Council) cited section 21 of FOIA to refuse the request for the information.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on section 21(1) of FOIA to refuse the request for information already in the public domain.
No steps are required as a result of this decision.
Keywords: Land Ownership.
Exemptions cited: FOI 21
IC-353736-W1N1: Home Office
The complainant requested information from the Home Office about information provided by Facewatch. Section 10(1) of FOIA states that a public authority must respond to a request within 20 working days. Section 17(3) of FOIA states that where a public authority is relying on a qualified exemption, it can have a “reasonable” extension of time to consider the public interest in maintaining the exemption or disclosing the information.
The Commissioner does not consider there to be any exceptional circumstances and finds that, by failing to respond to the request within a reasonable time frame, the public authority has breached section 17(3) of FOIA. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
IC-329881-K7Y0: British Film Institute
The complainant has requested information from the British Film Institute (BFI) relating to the extension of an employment contract. The BFI provided the information it held with redactions for some personal information, citing section 40(2) of FOIA. The complainant considered that there was further information which had not been provided. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the BFI does not hold any further information to which the complainant is entitled. However, the Commissioner has recorded a breach of section 10(1) of FOIA because of the late provision of some information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10(1)
IC-336407-T4S7: Government Legal Department
The complainant requested information regarding the statutory authority for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to acquire, hold and dispose of land. The Government Legal Department (GLD) denied holding the requested information.
The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the GLD does not hold the requested information and has complied with section 1(1)(a) of FOIA.
The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
No steps are required as a result of this decision.
Keywords: Points of law
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1)
IC-331488-J5X5: East Grinstead Town Council
The complainant requested information from East Grinstead Town Council (“the council”) relating to the minutes of a meeting. The council disclosed some information however the complainant believes that more information will be held by it. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council does not hold any further information for the purposes of section 1 of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
IC-353734-F0R2: Hertford Heath Parish Council
The complainant requested information from Hertford Heath Parish Council about the recommendations and advice issued by Aecom and Locality. 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
IC-354438-V0N0: Information Commissioner
The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority breached section 10(1) of FOIA by failing to provide a response within 20 working days.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
IC-320150-H6C0: Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust
The complainant has requested the name and contact details of a specific member of staff. Walsall Healthcare NHS Trust (“the public authority”) refused to provide the requested information, citing section 40(2) (personal information) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that to disclose the requested information would be unlawful and so the public authority was correct to withhold it under section 40(2). The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
IC-321541-C3T8: Fermanagh and Omagh District Council
The Commissioner’s decision is that that Fermanagh and Omagh District Council (“the Council”) is entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(e) of the EIR to withhold some information relating to a specific newspaper article involving the Council. As part of the requested information falls under the FOIA the Commissioner’s decision is also that the Council is entitled to rely upon section 30 of FOIA (investigations and proceedings) to withhold that part of the requested information.
The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e); FOI 30
IC-324756-S3X5: Wiltshire Council
The complainant submitted a four part request for information held by Wiltshire Council (“the Council”) relating to drainage works at a specific location. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council has provided all of the information held that is relevant to parts 2, 3 and 4 of the request, but holds further information within the scope of part 1 of the request. As the Council has failed to identify and provide all of the information held that is relevant to part 1 of the complainant’s request, the Commissioner has found a breach of regulation 5 of the EIR. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. The Council must issue a fresh response to part 1 of the request, conducting adequate searches aimed at identifying all of the relevant information held. The Council must take this step within 30 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commi
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1)
IC-331009-H9W2: Imperial College London
The complainant has requested information about legal fees. The above public authority refused the request as vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was not entitled tor effuse the request as vexatious. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a fresh response, to the request that does not rely on section 14(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
IC-331482-F6J6: Financial Ombudsman Service Limited
The complainant has requested information regarding the dates a specific member of staff worked at the Financial Ombudsman Service (the FOS). The FOS relied on section 40(2) of FOIA (third party personal information) to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FOS 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)
IC-335237-T6D2: Durham County Council
The complainant requested legal advice relating to a Selective Landlord License Scheme. Durham County Council (the “Council”) refused the request, citing the exception for the course of justice (regulation 12(5)(b)). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR to withhold the requested information but that in failing to issue a refusal notice in time it breached regulation 14(2). The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 14(2)(1)
IC-324443-Q6L7: NMC
The complainant has requested information from the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) concerning complaints where the complainant had alleged adverse treatment of any kind due to whistleblowing activity. The NMC relied on section 12(1) of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request engages section 12 and therefore the NMC was entitled to refuse it. However, in failing to provide reasonable advice and assistance, the NMC did not comply with its section 16(1) obligation. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0085 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16(1)
IC-330166-Z4M6: Gloucestershire County Council
The complainant has requested information about inspections carried out on a particular road and the training records of staff who carry out road inspections. Gloucestershire County Council (‘the Council’) provided some of the requested information but relied on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold individual training records and to redact staff names from inspection records. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on section 40(2) to withhold some of the requested information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
IC-347118-V7X5: North East London NHS Foundation Trust
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(1)
IC-341596-P8G2: Metropolitan Police Service
The complainant has requested contact details from the Metropolitan Police Service (the “MPS”). The MPS disclosed some information but advised that the remainder was not held. Further information was disclosed during the investigation, which the complainant indicated satisfied the request. However, he remained unhappy with the MPS’s general handling of the request.
The Commissioner has considered timeliness and how the MPS dealt with the request under section 16 (Advice and assistance) of FOIA. In providing its initial response outside of the 20 working day time limit, the MPS breached section 10 (Time for compliance) of FOIA. However, although there has been confusion regarding the request, the Commissioner considers that the MPS’s responses were reasonable and there was no failure to comply with section 16. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 16
IC-331454-N6T1: Wyre Borough Council
The complainant requested a copy of the food hygiene inspection report for a restaurant. Wyre Council (“the Council”) refused the request citing section 30(1)(b) (investigations and proceedings conducted by public
authorities) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on section 30(1)(b) of FOIA to refuse to provide the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30(1)
IC-331817-R4D9: Department for Work and Pensions
The complainant has requested information on how to go about checking his national insurance credits, and related information. The Department for Work & Pensions (“the DWP”) refused the request, citing section 40(1) (Personal information) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was not for the complainant’s personal data and that the DWP was not entitled to rely on section 40(1) of FOIA to refuse the request. He also finds that the DWP failed to comply with the provisions of section 1(1)(a) (General right of access) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the DWP to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a fresh response to the request, which does not rely on section 40(1) of FOIA. The DWP should confirm or deny whether it holds recorded information falling within the scope of each point of the request. If recorded information is held, it should either be disclosed or a refusal notice issued which complies with section 17(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 40
IC-330813-H6F3: Bath and North East Somerset Council
The complainant has requested information relating to a named social worker in the employ of Bath & North East Somerset Council (the Council). The request was refused under section 40(2) (personal information) of FOIA.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was correct to apply section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold the information falling within points one to five of the request.
The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
IC-323030-C1C6: HM Treasury
The complainant submitted a request to HM Treasury (HMT) seeking copies of minutes of the East West Rail Economic Growth Board. HMT withheld this information on the basis of section 35(1)(a) (formulation or development of government policy) of FOIA and regulation 12(4)(e) (internal communications) of the EIR. The information withheld on the basis of regulation 12(4)(e) is exempt from disclosure on the basis of this exception and the public interest favours withholding this information. The information withheld on the basis of regulation 35(1)(a) is exempt from disclosure on the basis of that exemption. For the majority of the information, the public interest favours withholding this. For the remainder of the information the public interest favours its disclosure. HMT breached regulation 11(4) of the EIR by not completing the internal review within 40 working days.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11; EIR 12(4)(e); FOI 35
IC-340645-J2Z8: Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council
The complainant requested information relating to media statements. Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (the “Council”) confirmed that it did not hold the information. During the Commissioner’s investigation the Council disclosed information to the complainant. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council disclosed all the relevant information held at the time of the request and complied with section 1(1) but that it failed to do this in time and breached section 10(1). The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0084 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1); FOI 10(1)
IC-348065-J1R8: Maritime and Coastguard Agency
1. Request:
The complainant requested the following information from Maritime and Coastguard Agency on 30 October 2024 via What Do They Know
Migrant and small boat standard operating procedures - a Freedom of Information request to Maritime and Coastguard Agency - WhatDoTheyKnow :
2. Commissioner’s Decision:
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.
3. Steps:
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. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
IC-347682-V4X8: Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust
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