3 Sep 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of policies and procedures. The above public authority disclosed some information and relied on section 21 of FOIA (reasonably accessible) to withhold the remainder. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the public authority has now either disclosed all the information it holds or indicated where it can be found. However, as the public authority failed to communicate all relevant information or issue an adequate refusal notice within 20 working days it breached sections 10 and 17 of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10; FOI 17
3 Sep 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to meetings with specific companies. The above public authority relied on regulations 12(4)(d) (material in the course of completion) and 12(4)(e) of the EIR (internal communications) to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that regulation 12(4)(d) is engaged, but that the public interest favours disclosure. Regulation 12(4)(e) is engaged in respect of all the information to which the public authority has applied it, but the public interest only favours maintaining the exception for some of the information. For the remaining information, the public interest favours disclosure. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose a copy of the letter identified in paragraph 10 and the readouts identified in paragraph 21. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0388 appeal allowed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 12(4)(e)
3 Sep 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(1)
2 Sep 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to a planning application. East Riding of Yorkshire Council (the “Council”) initially withheld the information but during the Commissioner’s investigation it disclosed some information and confirmed that no further information was held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has disclosed all the information it holds that falls within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
View East Riding of Yorkshire Council
2 Sep 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the University of York (‘the University’) correctly applied section 14(1) of FOIA to the complainant’s request for correspondence between named individuals, because the request is vexatious. It’s not necessary for the University to take any corrective steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0351 appeal allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
2 Sep 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (the Council) regarding the decision to use the COVID Outbreak Management Fund (‘COMF’) to purchase and convert buses. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold any additional information within the scope of the request, beyond what it has already provided. The Commissioner also finds that the Commission breached section 10(1) and 17(1) of FOIA by failing to communicate information or issue a refusal notice within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0375 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10(1); FOI 17
View Sandwell Council
2 Sep 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Thames Valley Police (TVP) regarding a misconduct in public office allegation. TVP relied on sections 30(3) and 40(5) to neither confirm nor deny (“NCND”) holding the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that TVP was entitled to rely on section 30(3) to NCND holding the requested information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30
View Thames Valley Police
2 Sep 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the University of York (‘the University’) correctly applied section 40(2) of FOIA to the majority of the requested information associated with a previous FOIA complaint that it’s withholding. The University misapplied section 40(2) to a little of the information but this information is exempt under section 40(1). The information is other people’s and the complainant’s personal data and disclosing it wouldn’t be lawful. The University’s refusal notice didn’t comply with section 17(1) of FOIA as it incorrectly cited section 40(2) in respect of the complainant’s own personal data. It’s not necessary for the University to take any corrective steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0352 appeal Part Allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 40(1); FOI 40(2)
2 Sep 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the Cabinet Office information relating to a letter to Boris Johnson about access to legal funding for the participation in the covid enquiry. The Cabinet Office refused the request citing sections 36(2)(b)(i), 36(2)(b)(ii), 36(2)(C) and sections 41(1), 42, 43, and 43(2) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office was entitled to rely on sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) to refuse the request. However, by failing to respond to the request within 20 working days, the Cabinet Office breached sections 1, 10 and 17 of FOIA.The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17(3); FOI 36(2)(b)(i); FOI 36(2)(b)(ii); FOI 36(2)(c)
View Cabinet Office
30 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about train designs. The above public authority initially provided some information before relying on section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was not 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
30 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of a letter sent to Thurrock Council (the Council) by a financial consultancy firm. The Council refused to disclose the requested information, citing section 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA as its basis for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly applied section 43(2) of FOIA to withhold the requested information, and that the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. However, the Council breached section 10(1) of FOIA as it failed to provide a response within the statutory 20 working day timeframe. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 43
View Thurrock Council
30 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Arts Council England (ACE) about Edsential Community Interest Company (CIC). ACE provided some information but relied on sections 41 (information provided in confidence), 43(2) (commercial interests) and 40(2) (third party personal information) of FOIA to withhold the remaining information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has incorrectly relied on section 40(2) of FOIA in withholding some of the information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Disclose the names or job titles of the members of the Governance Board of Edsential CIC in the requested information. No other personal data should be disclosed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Arts Council England
30 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested model solutions to questions in mathematics exams. The above public authority relied on sections 43(1) and 43(2) of FOIA (trade secrets and commercial interests) to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority is not entitled to rely on either sections 43(1) or 43(2) of FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the information it has relied upon the exemptions to withhold.Keywords: exam papers
Exemptions cited: FOI 43(2) (1)
View The University of Cambridge
30 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested a copy of the water industry national environment programme (WINEP) sent by the Environment Agency to water companies. The Environment Agency refused the request under regulation 12(4)(d) EIR – material in the course of completion. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Environment Agency has correctly applied regulation 12(4)(d) and that the public interest favours maintaining the exception and withholding the information. However, the Commissioner finds the Environment Agency has breached regulation 11(1) as it failed to provide an internal review within 40 working days. The Commissioner does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(1); EIR 12(4)(d)
View Environment Agency
30 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to ADHD and ASD referrals. The Trust refused the request under section 12 (cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit). The Commissioner’s decision is that the request engages section 12 and therefore the Trust was entitled to refuse it. In failing to provide any reasonable advice and assistance, the Trust breached section 16 (advice and assistance) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust
30 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information held by Penkridge Parish Council (the parish council) about a tender exercise relating to a particular refurbishment. The Commissioner’s decision is that the parish council has breached section 16(1) (advice and assistance) of FOIA. This is because part of the request did not have a single objective reading, and the parish council failed to seek clarification of this part of the request from the complainant under section 1(3) of FOIA. The Commissioner also considers that the parish council has breached section 1(1) (general right of access) of FOIA, as it misconstrued the remaining parts of the request, and did not provide the information requested, or advise that it was not held. The Commissioner requires the parish council to provide the complainant with advice and assistance by requesting clarification of one part of the request, and to issue a fresh response to all parts of the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1); FOI 16(1)
29 Aug 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. 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 FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Staffordshire County Council
29 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested the Outline Business Case for the extension to the Evelina London Children’s Hospital. Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust (‘the Trust’) withheld this information under sections 36(2)(b), 36(2)(c) and 43(2) of FOIA, which concern prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs and commercial interests, respectively. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust was entitled to withhold the information under sections 36(2)(b) and 36(2)(c) of FOIA. It’s not necessary for the Trust to take any corrective steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0382 appeal withdrawn.
Exemptions cited: FOI 36(2)(b); FOI 36(2)(c)
View Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
29 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant sent a follow-on request for information regarding Waste Services overseen by Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council. The Council stated it did not hold the requested information.
The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the public authority has not complied with regulation 5(1) of the EIR because it has not considered whether information was held on its behalf.
The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: • to conduct adequate searches of the Council’s systems and documents to establish if the requested information is held and issue a fresh response in accordance with its obligations under the EIR.• Issue a fresh response, to the request, on the basis that information held by the Tomorrow Valley Group is also held on behalf of the public authority.
The public authority must take these steps within 30 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Fail
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1)
View Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council
29 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to an inspection. Ofsted refused the request, citing section 33 (public audit functions) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Ofsted was entitled to withhold the requested information under section 33. However, in failing to disclose all of the requested information, or cite an appropriate exemption, within the statutory timeframe, Ofsted breached section 10 (timescale for compliance) and section 17 (refusal notice) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 17; FOI 33
View Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills
29 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested names of individuals attending Bullying and Harassment Roundtable meetings between specified dates from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (‘DCMS’).In relation to the aspects of DCMS’s response which constitute this case, the Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, DCMS does not hold the names of the external attendees. It therefore complied with section 1(1) of FOIA. It was also correct to withhold personal information of its own employee under section 40(2). Consequently the Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken by DCMS in relation to this request. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0350 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 40(2)
View Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport
29 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of a mayor’s work diary for a 12-month period. Liverpool City Region Combined Authority (“the authority”) refused the request under section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious requests). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to refuse the request under section 14(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Liverpool City Region Combined Authority
29 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested various information in respect of a planning application within the boundaries of Folkestone & Hythe District Council (‘the Council’). The Council provided some information but withheld information in respect of items 1,2,3, 4 and 7 of the request citing regulation 12(3) (personal information), 12(5)(b) (the course of justice) and regulation 12(5)(d) (confidentiality of proceedings) of the EIR. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the Council also sought to rely on regulation 12(5)(f) (interests of the information provider) in respect of the information it was withholding under regulation 12(5)(d). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has not complied with its obligations under regulation 5(1) of the EIR to identify all relevant information; that it was not entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(d) and has failed to demonstrate that regulation 12(5)(f) is engaged. The Council has however, correctly cited regulation 12(5)(b) in re
Exemptions cited: EIR 11; EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 12(5)(d); EIR 12(5)(f); EIR 14; EIR 5(1)
View Folkestone and Hythe District Council
28 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from Monmouthshire County Council (the Council), certain financial information in respect of a specified financial year. The Council provided some information, however the complainant wanted further detail about the “functions” or services provided by contractors or suppliers (ie what, exactly, they had been paid to do – “the functions that the public are paying for”). The Council cited section 12 of FOIA (‘cost of compliance’) to refuse to comply with the request for that information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was correct to refuse to comply with the request, on the basis of section 12 of FOIA. However, the Commissioner also finds that the Council didn’t comply with its obligations under section 16 of FOIA (‘advice and assistance’). The Commissioner requires the Council to provide the complainant with advice and assistance to help them to refine the request of 6 March 2024 such that it falls within the cost limit, or if the request
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Monmouthshire County Council
28 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information relating to Folkstone and Hythe District Council’s (the Council) housing stock. The Council provided some information but cited regulation 12(5)(e) (commercial interests) and regulation 12(3) (personal data) of the EIR to withhold further information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was correct to apply regulation 12(5)(e) to withhold some of the information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0340 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e)
View Folkestone and Hythe District Council
28 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has submitted a number of requests for information held by Maidstone Borough Council (the council) about the way in which it has handled certain planning matters. The complainant has raised concerns with the Commissioner about the council’s failure to provide two sets of information in response to their information requests. Whilst the Commissioner considers that the FOIA is the correct information access regime, he has decided that, on the balance of probabilities, the council does not hold one of the sets of information described by the complainant. With regard to the second set of information, the Commissioner is satisfied that the council is entitled to rely on section 40(2) (third party personal information) of FOIA, as its basis for refusing to provide this information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 40(2)
View Maidstone Borough Council
28 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested influencer guidelines which were provided to Government Communication Service users on 16 November 2023.The Cabinet Office applied section 21 (information accessible to the applicant by other means) to the first page of the guidelines only and withheld the remaining requested information under section 35(1)(a)(formulation or development of government policy).The Commissioner’s decision is that section 21 is engaged in respect of the first page of the withheld information but section 35(1)(a) is not engaged to the remaining information.
The Commissioner requires the Cabinet Office to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation.
• Disclose all but the first page of the withheld information to the complainant.
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 pursua
Exemptions cited: FOI 35(1)(a)
View Cabinet Office
28 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about reportable incidents. The above public authority relied on section 24 (national security) and 31 (law enforcement) of FOIA to withhold the information. The Commissioner’s decision is that neither section 24 nor 31 is engaged. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose, to the complainant, the information it has relied on exemptions to withhold.
Exemptions cited: FOI 24; FOI 31
View Office of Gas and Electricity Markets
28 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the BBC correctly applied section 12(1) of FOIA to three of the complainant’s requests about the Media Café. This is because it would exceed the appropriate cost limit to comply with each of these requests. In respect of the three requests, there was no breach of section 16(1) which concerns advice and assistance. It’s not necessary for the BBC to take any corrective steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0372 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16(1)
View BBC
28 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
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. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1)
View Carmarthenshire County Council
27 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that, at the time of the request, Airedale NHS Foundation Trust (‘the Trust’) was entitled to withhold the information in parts 1, 3 and 4 of the applicant’s request for information about the Phoenix Partnership under section 43(2) of FOIA. This exemption concerns commercial interests. But the Commissioner has also decided that aspects of the Trust’s refusal of the request didn’t comply with section 17(1) of FOIA. It’s not necessary for the Trust to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 43(2)
View Airedale NHS Foundation Trust
27 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a renumeration report. Queen Mary University of London (“the University”) disclosed a redacted version of the report but withheld information under section 40(2) (personal information) and section 43(2) (commercial interests). The Commissioner’s decision is that the University has correctly withheld the information it did under section 40(2) and section 43(2). The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2); FOI 43(2)
View Queen Mary University of London
27 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information connected to its website from Humberside Police. Humberside Police provided some information and said that some was not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, no further information is held. He does find a breach of section 10(1) (Time for compliance) of FOIA. No steps are required.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View Humberside Police
27 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about proposals relating to Clair Hall in Haywards Heath. Mid Sussex District Council (the “Council”) withheld the information under the exemption for information provided in confidence (section 41). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was correct to refuse the request under section 41(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 41
View Mid Sussex District Council
27 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to complaints about the conduct of Liz Truss in her role as Foreign Secretary. The Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) initially relied on section 40(5B) of FOIA (third party personal information) to neither confirm or deny the information was held. It later changed its position to rely on section 1 of FOIA (information not held) for information falling in scope of the request for the period up to 23 July 2022. For any information falling in scope of the request for the period from 24 July 2022 to 6 September 2022, it maintained its position of neither confirming or denying that the information was held citing section 40(5B) of FOIA (third party personal information).The Commissioner’s decision is that the FCDO has correctly relied on section 1 for the requested information for the period up to 23 July 2022 and on section 40(5B) for information falling in scope of the request relating to the period from 24 July 2022 t
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 40(5)(b)
View Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
27 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
Following issue of this Decision Notice, it was brought to the Commissioner’s attention that the public authority did email the complainant with a response on 25 April 2024 and emailed the ICO on 15 August 2024 providing us with a copy of that response. However, due to an IT issue, neither of the emails were received by the complainant or the ICO on those retrospective dates.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Lewisham Council
23 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding the number of children that were sexually exploited while in the care of Rochdale Borough Council (the Council). The Council has relied on section 12(2) of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse to confirm or deny whether it held information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on section 12(2) of FOIA to refuse to confirm or deny whether it held information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner also finds that the Council has complied with its section 16 obligation by explaining why it was unable to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(2); FOI 16
View Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
23 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information regarding Loan charge communications. HM Revenue and Customs (“HMRC”) relied on section 12 of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that HMRC was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner also finds that HMRC 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; FOI 16
23 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) in a multi-part request, including information about authorisations in place for the monitoring/interception of legally privileged telecommunications. The MoJ provided some information within the scope of the request, but refused to confirm or deny whether the remaining information is held, citing sections 31(3) (law enforcement), 38(2) (health and safety) and 40(5) (personal information) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MoJ was entitled to rely on section 40(5B)(a)(i) of FOIA. No steps are required as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40
View Ministry of Justice
23 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to various different stoppages. The Canal and River Trust provided answers to the questions but stated no Board minutes referring to the stoppages were held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the public authority has correctly relied on 12(4)(a) of the EIR because it does not hold the requested Board minutes. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
View Canal and River Trust
23 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Metropolitan Borough of Wirral (the public authority). By the date of this notice the public authority had not issued a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Wirral Council
23 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested correspondence relating to continuing healthcare plans. The Commissioner’s decision is that the above public authority failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and therefore breached section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View NHS Hampshire and Isle of Wight ICB
23 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) relating to the Head of Station for Radio 2’s involvement in personnel decisions. The BBC responded that the requested information was covered by the derogation and hence excluded from FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information, if held at all, is held by the BBC for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and so is not covered by FOIA. He therefore upholds the BBC’s position and requires no steps to be taken in this case.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
View BBC
22 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on contracts awarded to particular companies. The Home Office disclosed much of the requested information but it withheld some information about particular contracts, citing section 24(1) (National security) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the withheld information was exempt from disclosure under section 24.
Exemptions cited: FOI 24
View Home Office
22 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to an SAI report of a trip which took place in May 2020 from (Name redacted) Care Home to Trust led day centres. Southern Health and Social Care Trust (SHSCT) relied on section 40(2) of FOIA (third party personal information) to withhold the information.The Commissioner’s decision is that SHSCT is entitled to withhold some of the information it holds under section 40(2) of FOIA as it is the personal data of another individual and disclosure would be unlawful.The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Southern Health and Social Care Trust
22 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant made a number of requests for information to Cornwall Council (“the council”) relating two planning applications. The council aggregated the three requests and refused to respond further, applying Regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR. It subsequently confirmed that no information is held as regards one of the requests. The complainant disputes that the information should have been considered under the EIR, and argues that the council is wrong to apply Regulation 12(4)(b) to refuse the requests. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to aggregate the requests and to consider the information under the EIR. He has also decided that it was correct to apply Regulation 12(4)(b) to refuse to respond to the requests further. The Commissioner does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
View Cornwall Council
22 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made a four-part request for information about advertising campaigns. The West of England Combined Authority issued a response in which it stated that some parts of the request were not valid requests for information, and that for the remainder, the information was exempt from disclosure. During the course of investigation, WECA informed the Commissioner that upon review, it considered that all parts of the request were valid requests for information, and that its original response to the request did not therefore comply with FOIA. WECA also acknowledged that at the time of the request, it did not appear that appropriate searches for information had been carried out before determining that certain information was exempt from disclosure. The Commissioner’s decision is that WECA has failed to respond to the request in compliance with its duties under section 1 (General right of access to information) and section 10 (Time for compliance with the request). The Commissio
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10(1)
View West of England Combined Authority
22 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information about vehicle movements at Leeds East Airfield. North Yorkshire Council (the “Council”) withheld the information under the exception for the course of justice (regulation 12(5)(b)). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to withhold the information under regulation 12(5)(b) and that its internal review complied with regulation 11(4). However, he also finds that the Council breached regulation 5(2) because its initial response was outside 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 5(2)
View North Yorkshire County Council
22 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department for Education (DfE) correctly applied the exemption under section 35(1)(a)(formulation of government policy) to the requested revisions to “Guidance for Schools and Colleges: Gender Questioning Children” and the public interest favours maintaining the exemption. It’s not necessary for DfE to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35(1)(a)
View Department for Education
22 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to film certification. The British Film Institute (BFI) has refused to provide the information citing section 44(1)(a) (prohibitions on disclosure) of FOIA as its basis for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that BFI has failed to demonstrate that section 44(1)(a) is engaged. The Commissioner requires BFI to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.• Disclose the withheld information.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 44(1)(a)
View British Film Institute