18 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about timescales of security clearance applications. The Cabinet Office (“the CO”) relied on section 12 of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request.The Commissioner’s decision is that the CO was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner also considers that the CO complied with its section 16 obligation to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1)
View Cabinet Office
18 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
1. The complainant has requested information about the handling of a complaint made to a particular court, and associated procedural information. The Ministry of Justice (“MoJ”) said that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision regarding the first part of the request is that the MoJ does not hold the requested information for the purposes of FOIA, in accordance with the definition at section 3(2) of FOIA. For the second part of the request, he has decided that, on the balance of probabilities, the MoJ does not hold the requested information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Ministry of Justice
18 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to carbon credits held by EDF Energy Limited (EDF) and/or its relevant subsidiaries. EDF refused to comply with the request as it did not consider that it was subject to the EIR.The Commissioner’s decision is that EDF is not a public authority for the purposes of the EIR and therefore it was not under an obligation to respond to the request. As EDF is not a public authority, the Commissioner is unable to compel it to take any steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0056 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: EIR 2(2)
18 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from Cowbridge and Llanblethian Town Council (the Council) information regarding an investigation report that was written and sent to the Council. The request was refused and the Council relied on sections 40(2) (personal information) and 41 (information provided in confidence) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is the Council was entitled to rely on section 41(1) of FOIA to refuse to provide the information requested. Therefore, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41(1)
18 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of a resignation letter from a former Parish Councillor. Wanborough Parish Council (the Council) withheld the information 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 resignation letter. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0021 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
18 Dec 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from Oxfordshire County Council (“the council”) copies of the council’s correspondence with the ICO. The council initially refused the request on the basis that section 12 applied. On review, it maintained its position that section 12 applied, however it disclosed some information falling within the scope of the request (up to the appropriate limit). It redacted information from the information that was disclosed, applying the exemptions in section 21 (information available by other means), 40(2) (personal data of third parties), section 30 (investigations) and 41 (information provided in confidence). The complainant complained that the council was wrong to redact information under sections 21, 30 and 41. They also argued that further information will be held by the council. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was not correct to apply section 12. He has therefore not gone on to consider the remainder of the exemptions applied by the council. T
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View Oxfordshire County Council
17 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on complaints received by the BBC about a specific named employee. The BBC relied on section 40(5B) to refuse to confirm or deny whether it held any information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner has concluded that the BBC is entitled to rely on section 40(5B) to refuse to confirm or deny whether it holds any information falling within the scope of the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View BBC
17 Dec 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
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
View Metropolitan Police Service
17 Dec 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request to the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (the council) for information relating to Weavers Quarter.The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, the council does not hold information, within the scope of the request, in relation to questions two, four and ten. However, in relation to questions three and eight, he considers that, on the balance of probabilities, the council may hold the requested information. In relation to questions one, five, six, the Commissioner’s decision is that the council was not entitled to rely upon section 21 (information accessible to the applicant by other means). However, in relation to question nine, the Commissioner’s decision is that the council was entitled to rely upon sections 21 and 22 (information intended for future publication) to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner has also found that in failing to respond to the request within the statutory timescale, the council b
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 21; FOI 22
View Barking and Dagenham Council
17 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information about any contact that Great Wakering Parish Council (the Council) had had with its insurers in connection with bonfires on allotments. The Council provided a copy of a risk assessment and stated that it did not hold any other information falling within the 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 any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5
17 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has made various requests for information about Traffic Regulation Orders and specific roads. Derbyshire County Council refused to comply with the requests on the basis that they were vexatious under section 14(1) (vexatious requests) of FOIA and regulation 12(4)(b) (manifestly unreasonable requests) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to apply section 14(1) of FOIA, and that where the requests seek environmental information, the Council is entitled to rely upon regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0070 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b); FOI 14(1)
View Derbyshire County Council
17 Dec 2024Complaint 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 Department for Culture, Media and Sport
17 Dec 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about any communications relating to the former Secretary of State Michael Gove and the subject of recusal. The Ministry and Housing, Communities, and Local Government refused to confirm or deny that information was held under the exemptions provided by section 40(5) (Personal information) and section 41(2) (Information provided in confidence). During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the MHCLG revised its position. It confirmed that information was held but withheld it under the exemption provided by section 40(2) (Personal information) and section 41(1) (Information provided in confidence). The Commissioner’s decision is that the MHCLG has correctly relied on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold the information. However, the MHCLG breached section 10(1) by failing to confirm that the information was held within the time for compliance. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 40(2)
View Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
17 Dec 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from the Police and Crime Commissioner for Northamptonshire (the OPFCC) relating to the vetting process. The Commissioner’s decision is that the OPFCC has breached section 10(1) of FOIA by failing to respond to the complainant’s further request dated 17 September 2024. The Commissioner requires the OPFCC to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The OPFCC 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 10(1)
17 Dec 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about weekly meetings the Home Office has with asylum seekers at one of its sites. The Home Office disclosed some information but withheld the remainder citing section 40(2) (Personal information) of FOIA.The complainant was content for personal information to be withheld but asked the Commissioner to determine whether or not the redactions were proportionate. The Commissioner has determined that section 40(2) is only partly engaged. The Commissioner requires the Home Office to disclose the information listed in the table at the end of this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Home Office
17 Dec 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of correspondence from the executive team to the Labour Party. The above public authority relied on section 31 of FOIA (law enforcement) to refuse to confirm or deny that it held any information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has not demonstrated that section 31(3) of FOIA is engaged. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Confirm or deny whether it holds any information within the scope of both part 1 and part 2 the request. If any information is held, it must either be disclosed or a refusal notice issued that complies with section 17 of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31(3)
View Gambling Commission
17 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to a shellfish farm in Carlingford lough. Newry, Mourne and Down District Council (“the Council”) relied on regulation 13(5) of the EIR (third party personal information) to neither confirm nor deny that it holds the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly relied on regulation 13(5) to neither confirm nor deny that it holds the requested information. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0020 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: EIR 13(5)
17 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the application of particular theories of psychology in restricting human rights for the purposes of national security. The above public authority (“the public authority”) relied on section 12(1) of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request.The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner also finds that the public authority complied with its section 16 obligation to offer advice and assistance.The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16
View Home Office
17 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested correspondence between the Forestry Commission (“the public authority”) and the King. The public authority denied holding any information that would fall within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, no information is held. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
View Forestry Commission
17 Dec 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information from Swansea Council (the Council) relating to two planning applications. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR by failing to provide the information within 20 working days. The Commissioner also finds that the Council has breached regulation 11(4) of the EIR as it failed to carry out its internal review within 40 working days. The requested information was provided to the complainant at internal review stage, therefore the Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 5(2)
View Swansea Council
17 Dec 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested NMC to disclose the nurse’s PINs for two named individuals. NMC initially applied section 40(2) of FOIA. However, during the Commissioner’s investigation NMC withdrew its reliance on this exemption, confirmed that it only holds the historic General Nursing Council (GNC) registration number for one of the named individuals and advised that it was willing to disclose this to the complainant. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities NMC only holds the GNC registration number for the named individual and does not hold any further recorded information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner requires NMC to disclose the GNC Registration Number for the nurse it has traced.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View NMC
16 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to how Cheshire East Council (the Council) manage odour breaches. The Council stated that it was relying on regulation 12(4)(b) (manifestly unreasonable) of the EIR to refuse the request. The Commissioner finds that the Council was entitled to apply regulation 12(4)(b) to the request. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
View Cheshire East Council
16 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of a set of minutes. The above public authority initially withheld some information before determining that it did not in fact hold the document being sought. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the public authority does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Financial Conduct Authority
16 Dec 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the staff responsible for the Continuing Healthcare (‘CHC’) Service in Liverpool. NHS Cheshire and Merseyside Integrated Care Board (‘the ICB’) provided some information on staffing but relied on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold details of staff names, phone numbers and email addresses. In regards to the requested staff structure, the ICB stated that it does not currently hold this information but it intends to publish its new staff structure once agreed. The Commissioner’s decision is that the ICB was entitled to rely on section 40(2) to withhold the requested information relating to staff names and contact details. However, he also finds that, on the balance of probabilities, the ICB does hold information relating to the requested staff structure. The Commissioner requires ICB to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Carry out searches to determine if it holds a previous version of the CHC staff structure
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 40(2)
View NHS Cheshire and Merseyside ICB
16 Dec 2024Complaint 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.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
16 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information held by Oxford City Council (the council) relating to the breakdown of the costs for the refurbishment of properties purchased for the purpose of accommodating Ukrainian and Afghan refugee families. The council withheld the requested information, citing section 43(2) (commercial interests), and section 40(2) (personal information), of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was not correct to have cited section 40(2). However, he is satisfied that the council is entitled to rely on section 43(2) of FOIA as its basis for withholding all of the information relevant to the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43(2)
View Oxford City Council
16 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about recruitment for a particular role. The Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) relied on section 40(2) (third party personal information) of FOIA to withhold some of the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FCA has correctly relied on section 40(2) of FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner does not require the FCA to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Financial Conduct Authority
16 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information related to the Measles, Mumps and Rubella (‘MMR’) litigation Authority to Do Contract Work awarded to a named solicitor between specified dates. The Ministry of Justice (the ’MOJ’) initially aggregated the complainant’s request with others made within 29 working days and relied on section 12(2) of FOIA (the ‘neither confirm nor deny’ provision for the cost of compliance). During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the MOJ revised its position and provided a one page document. Ultimately, the MOJ confirmed that no further recorded information in scope of this request was held, which the complainant disputed. The Commissioner’s decision is, on the balance of probabilities, that the MOJ does not hold any further information than has been provided. No steps are required as a result of this notice. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0109 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Ministry of Justice
16 Dec 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information about excess waste at a named depot. Thanet District Council (the ‘Council’) initially provided some of the requested information but withheld the requested report (specifically a briefing note) in its entirety, citing Regulation 12(4)(e) of the EIR – the exception for internal communications. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the Council carried out further searches and located photographs of the waste which it disclosed. The Council also disclosed a redacted version of the previously withheld briefing note, with information redacted under EIR Regulations 12(4)(e) and 12(5)(d) – the exception for the confidentiality of proceedings. Ultimately, the Council further revised its position. It now disclosed all the information previously withheld in the briefing note under the above EIR exceptions, such that it was no longer withholding any information. The Council explained that the remaining redactions were out of scope as they do
Exemptions cited: EIR 5; EIR 9
View Thanet District Council
16 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about ram raid incidents from Lincolnshire Police. Lincolnshire Police advised that some information was not held and that some was already available to the complainant and was therefore exempt under section 21 (Information accessible to applicant by other means) of FOIA. It would neither confirm nor deny (NCND) holding the remaining information, citing sections 30 (Investigations and proceedings) 40 (Personal information) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 21 was appropriately applied. He finds that sections 40(2) and 40(5)(b) are properly engaged in respect of some of the information and that Lincolnshire Police was entitled to NCND holding the remainder under section 30(3) of FOIA. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 21; FOI 30; FOI 40
View Lincolnshire Police
16 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding an alleged crime from West Mercia Police. West Mercia Police would initially neither confirm nor deny (“NCND”) holding any information, citing section 40(5) (Personal information) of FOIA. During the Commissioner’s investigation, following liaison with the complainant, West Mercia Police revised its position. It located and disclosed some information, with redactions made under sections 30(1) (Investigations and proceedings) and 40(2) (Personal information) of FOIA. At a later stage, following further liaison with the complainant, West Mercia Police revised its position again and cited section 12(2) (Cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that West Mercia Police was correct to rely on section 30(1). He also finds that it was entitled to rely on the cost limit. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 30
View West Mercia Police
16 Dec 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Harrogate and District NHS Trust (the Trust) regarding staff training and the refusal of treatment. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Trust has not conducted adequate searches for the requested information. The Commissioner requires the Trust to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Conduct a fresh search for the requested information and either disclose the information or provide an appropriate refusal notice under FOIA. The Trust 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 1
View Harrogate and District NHS Foundation Trust
16 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to section 684 of the Income Tax (PAYE) Regulations (ITEPA). HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) provided some information in response to the request but said that there is no right to invoke gross pay under section 684 ITEPA 2003.The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities HMRC does not hold further information within the scope of the request and has therefore complied with section 1(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
16 Dec 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of any sections of a report that refer to specific individuals. The request was logged as FOI.24.130. The above public authority initially refused to confirm or deny holding any information, before stating that it did not hold any information as the report concerned different matters and the individuals in question were not referred to. The Commissioner, who holds a copy of the report from a previous complaint, is satisfied that none of the individuals are mentioned or referred to. Consequently, the public authority could not and does not hold any information within the scope of the request. The public authority did breach section 10 of FOIA as it failed to inform the complainant, within 20 working days, that it did not hold any information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0045 appeal withdrawn.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View North East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust
13 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Westmorland and Furness Council (“the Council”) regarding noise complaints. The Council refused the request under regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR (manifestly unreasonable) on the grounds that complying with the request would incur unreasonable costs. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to refuse the request under regulation 12(4)(b). He also finds that the Council complied with its obligations under regulation 9 of the EIR to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b); EIR 9
View Westmorland and Furness Council
13 Dec 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust information about sexual safety incidents. 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 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 Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
13 Dec 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The public authority has failed to complete its public interest test considerations within a reasonable time in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The Commissioner requires it to provide a substantive response to the request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17(3)
View UK Health Security Agency
13 Dec 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Cardiff Council (“the Council”) relating to a proposed land exchange. The Council withheld the requested information under section 36(2)(c) of FOIA (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs). The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is environmental information within the definition at regulation 2(1)(c) of the EIR. The request should, therefore, have been handled by the Council under the EIR rather than the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Council to reconsider the request under the provisions of the EIR and issue a fresh response to the complainant to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: EIR 2(1)
View Cardiff Council
13 Dec 2024Complaint 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, the public authority did not provide a valid response within the statutory time frame. Therefore the Commissioner finds a breach of section 10.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
13 Dec 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of messages sent in a Parish Council WhatsApp group. Wanborough Parish Council (“the Parish Council”) stated that the information requested did not relate to the business of the Parish Council and was therefore not subject to disclosure under FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is held by the Parish Council for the purposes of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Parish Council to issue a fresh response to the request in accordance with FOIA, on the basis that the requested information is held for the purposes of FOIA, to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
13 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant asked for information in relation to Wynyard Village Extension Development. Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council (the Council) provided a link and documents in response to the request; however, the complainant questioned the amount of information disclosed, in response a refusal notice citing regulation 12(5)(d) – confidentiality of proceedings of the EIR was provided.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(d) in the circumstances of this case and he considers that the balance of the public interest favours maintaining the exception.The Commissioner does not require any steps as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0066 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(d)
View Stockton-on-Tees Council
13 Dec 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information held by Warwickshire County Council (the council) about parking control for a particular road. The Commissioner is satisfied that, on the balance of probabilities, the council does not hold information that falls within scope of the complainant’s request. However, as the council failed to issue a refusal notice in response to the request within the statutory 20 working days, the Commissioner has recorded a breach of regulation 14 of the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a); EIR 14
View Warwickshire County Council
13 Dec 2024Complaint 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, the public authority did not provide a valid response within the statutory time frame. Therefore the Commissioner finds a breach of section 10.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
13 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information in relation to payments made by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) under section 194 of the Legal Services Act 2007. HMRC provided some information, it relied on section 44(1) of FOIA (statutory prohibition on disclosure) to withhold part of the information.The Commissioner’s decision is that HMRC has correctly relied upon section 44(1) of FOIA.The Commissioner also found that HMRC complied with the requirements of section 10.The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2025/0050 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 44(1)(a)
12 Dec 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about inspections. The above public authority refused the request as vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has not demonstrated that the request was vexatious and is therefore not entitled to rely on section 14(1) of FOIA to refuse it. 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 in section 14(1) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills
12 Dec 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) information about referrals to the Nursing and Midwifery Council (the NMC). The Trust denied holding any information in response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that Trust breached section 16 of FOIA because it failed to obtain the correct objective reading of the request. The Commissioner requires the Trust to issue a fresh response to the request based on the interpretation set out in paragraph 16 of this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 16
View Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
12 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested demographic information relating to Cabinet attendees of ministerial and other ranks. The Cabinet Office stated that it did not hold some of the requested information and refused the remainder of the request under section 21 of FOIA (information reasonably accessible to the applicant). During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the Cabinet Office estimated that compliance with the request would exceed the appropriate limit at section 12 of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office was entitled to rely on section 12 to refuse the entire request. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View Cabinet Office
12 Dec 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested Defra to disclose information relating to phosphate mitigation and the nutrient neutrality policy for the Dorset, Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole areas. Defra refused the requests citing regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR (manifestly unreasonable).The Commissioner’s decision is that Defra is entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR for both requests and the public interest rests in maintaining the exception. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
12 Dec 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Birmingham City Council (the Council) regarding a specific job role and specification.The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold any further information within scope of the request.However, the Commissioner has recorded procedural breaches of sections 1 and 10 of FOIA as the Council failed to respond to the complainant’s request within the statutory time limits.The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Birmingham City Council
12 Dec 2024Complaint 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’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
View Haringey Council