13 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about lawful court seals. The Ministry of Justice (“MoJ”) refused to comply with the request, citing section 14(1) (vexatious requests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was vexatious and therefore the MoJ was entitled to refuse it in accordance with section 14(1). The Commissioner does not require the MoJ to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View Ministry of Justice
13 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to the department’s response to a historic settlement involving the complainant and the British Coal Corporation. DESNZ relied on FOIA section 12– cost of compliance, to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that DESNZ is entitled to refuse the request in reliance on FOIA section 12(2). The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0353 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12
View Department for Energy Security and Net Zero
12 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 Secretary of State for the Ministry of Justice. The Ministry of Justice (MOJ) initially relied on section 40(5B) of FOIA (third party personal information) to neither confirm or deny the information was held. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, it changed its position to rely on section 1 of FOIA (information not held) for information falling in scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that MOJ has complied with section 1 in respect of the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Ministry of Justice
12 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested DHSC to disclose its internal working paper relating to possible guidance for medical device users during a power outage. DHSC disclosed some information but withheld the remainder citing regulation 12(4)(d) and 12(4)(e) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that 12(4)(d) and 12(4)(e) of the EIR apply to the remaining withheld information but the aggregated public interest in maintaining these exceptions is outweighed by the aggregated public interest in favour of disclosure. The Commissioner requires DHSC to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the withheld information to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 12(4)(e)
View Department of Health and Social Care
12 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to staff workload and stress. St Mary's University Twickenham (“the public authority”) disclosed information in response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, in response to part 2 of the request, the public authority has failed to comply with its section 1 (general right of access to information held by public authorities) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: confirm or deny whether it holds information of the description specified in part 2 of the request and if held, disclose this information to the complainant unless a relevant exemption under part 2 of FOIA applies, in which case a valid refusal under section 17 (refusal of request) must be issued.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View St Mary's University, Twickenham
12 Aug 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 Staffordshire Police
12 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from East Suffolk and North East Essex NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) relating to the number of babies delivered by caesarean section under specific circumstances specified in the request. The Trust has stated that no babies were delivered under the circumstances specified in the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust has failed to comply with section 1 of FOIA due to it not conducting appropriate searches for information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner requires the Trust to conduct further appropriate searches for any further information falling within the scope of the request and, if further information is identified, to either provide that information, or issue an appropriate refusal notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust
12 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Home Office (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 complete its deliberations on the balance of the public interest within a reasonable time and has therefore breached section 17(3) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. Having confirmed whether or not information is held within the scope of the request either disclose the requested information or, to the extent that information is to be withheld, issue a refusal notice in accordance with the requirements of section 17 of the 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
Exemptions cited: FOI 17(3)
View Home Office
12 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.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust
12 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of information provided to an independent barrister. The above public authority refused to confirm or deny that the information was held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the information, if it were held, would be the complainant’s own personal information. The public authority was therefore entitled to rely on section 40(5A) of FOIA to refuse to confirm or deny that this information was held. However, the public authority breached section 17 of FOIA because its refusal notice was inadequate. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 40(5)(a)
View Department for Education
12 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 secretary of state in the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). DEFRA initially relied on section 40(5B)(a)(i) of FOIA (third party personal information) to neither confirm or deny the information was held. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, it changed its position to rely on section 1 (information not held) for information falling in scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that DEFRA has complied with section 1 in respect of the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
12 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 ministerial roles and as Prime Minister. The Cabinet Office initially relied on section 12 of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request. It later relied on section 1 (information not held) for information falling in scope of the request relating to the period up to 23 July 2022. For any information falling in scope of the request relating to the period from 24 July 2022 to 25 October 2022, it neither confirmed or denied the information was held citing section 40(5B) of FOIA (third party personal information) and section 36(3) (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office has correctly relied on section 1 for the requested information relating to the period up to 23 July 2022 and on section 40(5B) for any information falling in scope of the request relating to the period from 24 July 2022 to 25 October 2022. The Com
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 40(5)(b)
View Cabinet Office
12 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 Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Department for Education (DFE). DFE initially relied on section 40(5B) of FOIA (third party personal information) to neither confirm or deny the information was held. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, it changed its position to rely on section 1 of FOIA (information not held) for information falling in scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that DFE has complied with section 1 in respect of the requested information. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any the steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Department for Education
9 Aug 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 North Lincolnshire Council
9 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The applicant requested information from the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) about a named nurse. The NMC refused the request under section 40(2) of FOIA, which concerns third person personal data. The Commissioner’s decision is that the NMC should have neither confirmed nor denied it held the requested information under section 40(5B) of FOIA. He has applied this exemption himself, proactively. The NMC therefore breached section 17(1) of FOIA as it failed to issue a correct refusal notice within 20 working days. It’s not necessary for the NMC to take any corrective steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0359 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 17; FOI 40(5)(b)
View NMC
9 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the data protection registration of a Parish Council. The ICO refused the request as vexatious under section 14(1) FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was vexatious and therefore the ICO was entitled to rely upon section 14(1) FOIA to refuse it. The Commissioner does not require any steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0356 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Information Commissioner
8 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from NHS England (NHSE) information about the performance of Trusts regarding certain objectives. NHSE initially cited section 21 of FOIA, which concerns information that’s accessible to the applicant by other means. Later, at internal review stage, it stated that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probability, NHSE does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View NHS England
8 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the ability of the Department for Communities to determine the geographical location of claimants logging into Universal Credit accounts. The Department refused to confirm or deny that it held the requested information, citing section 31(3) in conjunction with section 31(1)(a) (prejudice to the prevention or detection of crime). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department was entitled to refuse to confirm or deny that it holds the requested information. No steps are required. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0322 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
8 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made a number of requests to North Middlesex University Hospital Trust (‘the Trust’). The requests topics include information about the number of complaints received about the CEO and the complaints procedure, discharge criteria and processes, details of how a complaint had been handled and copies of particular test results. The Trust refused the requests under section 14(1) FOIA (vexatious requests) and advised that it would no longer respond to requests about the same or similar topics under section 17(6) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Trust was entitled to rely on section 14(1) of FOIA to refuse the requests covered in this notice. He also finds that the Trust breached sections 10(1) and 17(5) of FOIA by failing to provide its responses and relevant refusal notice within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0358 appeal allowed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 14(1); FOI 17
View North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust
8 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about penalty charges from Liverpool City Council on 7 May 2024. 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 Liverpool City Council
8 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant made two information requests to the Home Office (the public authority). By the date of this notice the public authority had not issued a substantive response to either of the two requests. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has failed to complete its deliberations on the balance of the public interest within a reasonable time and has therefore breached section 17(3) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following step with respect to both requests to ensure compliance with the legislation. Having confirmed whether or not information is held within the scope of the requests: either disclose the requested information or, to the extent that information is to be withheld, issue a refusal notice in accordance with the requirements of section 17 of the 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 ce
Exemptions cited: FOI 17
View Home Office
8 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) about how earnings are calculated for the purposes of Universal Credit.The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the DWP does not hold the requested information.The Commissioner does not require the DWP to take any steps as a result of this decision notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Department for Work and Pensions
8 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a copy of a bank mandate from Hampton Lucy Parish Council (“the Parish Council”). The Parish Council refused the request on the grounds that the request is vexatious under section 14(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Parish Council is not entitled to rely on section 14(1) to refuse the request. The Commissioner requires the Parish Council to issue a fresh response to the request that does not rely on section 14(1) of FOI to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
8 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that London North Eastern Railway (LNER) is entitled to withhold some of the requested information about ticketing under section 43(2) of FOIA, which concerns commercial interests. It’s not necessary for LNER to take any corrective steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43(2)
8 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from HM Treasury (HMT) information relating to Griffith cryptocurrency engagement. HMT released some of the information requested but withheld the remaining information under sections 35(1)(a) (government policy), 35(1)(d) (the operation of any Ministerial office), 40(2) (third party personal data) and 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that HMT was entitled to rely on section 35(1)(a) of FOI to withhold the information requested. Therefore, he does not require HMT to take any steps as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35(1)(a)
View HM Treasury
8 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.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Haringey Council
8 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of all policies and procedures used by Milton Keynes Council (the Council) in relation to adult social care. The Council refused the request on the basis of section 14(2) (repeated requests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is not entitled to rely on section 14(2) of FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Provide a fresh response to the request without relying on section 14(2) of FOIA.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(2)
View Milton Keynes Council
8 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to contact between the City of Derry Airport (CODA) and TransReport. At the date of this decision notice, and despite the Commissioner’s intervention, CODA has not responded to the request. The Commissioner requires the public authority to respond to the request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
8 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information concerning the DOS5/6 RM1043.7 Framework and single supplier procurement process. The Cabinet Office (“CO”) provided links to the GOV.UK website where DOS framework information could be located. Its final position is that it does not hold the specific information the complainant has requested. The Commissioner’s decision is that the CO has complied with its obligations under section 1(1) of FOIA. On a balance of probabilities, the CO does not hold information falling within the scope of the request and has therefore complied with section 1(1)(a) of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1)(a)
View Cabinet Office
8 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested from the Parole Board for England and Wales information about parole board members on 2 March 2024. 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 Parole Board
8 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the ‘Today’ programme on BBC Radio 4. The BBC’s position is that the information is covered by the derogation and so is excluded from FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that any relevant information held by the BBC would be held for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and so isn’t covered by FOIA. It’s not necessary for the BBC to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
View BBC
8 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant submitted a request for communications between the Commandant RAFAC (Air Commodore) Keeling and his senior staff team RAF Canwell and Camp Commandant/OC RAF cadet camp at RAF Fairford for RIAT 2023. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOD is entitled to rely on section 12(1) (cost of compliance) of FOIA to refuse to provide the requested information.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1)
View Ministry of Defence
8 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) regarding the legal verdicts for COVID Vaccine contracts. The Commissioner’s decision is that UKHSA has failed to complete its deliberations on the balance of the public interest within a reasonable time and has therefore breached section 17(3) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires UKHSA to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. Having confirmed whether or not information is held within the scope of the request: either disclose the requested information or, to the extent that information is to be withheld, issue a refusal notice in accordance with the requirements of section 17 of FOIA. UKHSA 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 17(3)
View UK Health Security Agency
8 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. On 22 July 2024, the Commissioner wrote to the public authority, reminding it of its responsibilities and asking it to provide a substantive response to the complainant’s request within 10 working days. The public authority has failed to respond by this date. Based on the 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.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10(1)
View Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust
7 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested any information held by Oxford Direct Services Limited (“ODSL”) regarding whistleblowing over the last three years. ODSL said that it does not hold any relevant information. The Commissioner’s decision is that ODSL was correct to state that it does not hold any information falling within the scope of the complainant's request for information. The Commissioner does not require ODSL to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
7 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to a consultation on winter road gritting. Cumberland Council (the “Council”) disclosed some information and confirmed that other information was not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly confirmed that it does not hold the consultation responses identified in the request and that it complied with section 1(1) but that in disclosing some of the requested information outside the statutory time limit it breached section 10(1). The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1); FOI 10(1)
View Cumberland Council
7 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information from Oxford Direct Services Trading Limited (ODSTL) relating to its gul-e electric car charging system. ODSTL refused the request on the basis that section 43(2) (commercial interests) and section 12 (appropriate limit) of FOIA applied. The Commissioner’s decision is that ODSTL was correct to apply section 43(2) to withhold the information from disclosure. The Commissioner does not require ODSTL to take any further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43(2)
7 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that Our Lady’s Catholic Primary School (‘the School') is entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the request for information about absences because complying with the request would exceed the appropriate cost limit. However, he finds that the School failed to provide reasonable advice and assistance and therefore did not meet its obligations under section 16(1). The Commissioner requires that the School take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: The School must provide the complainant with advice and assistance to help them submit a request falling within the appropriate limit or explain why such a request isn’t possible.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16(1)
View ST CHAD'S CATHOLIC PRIMARY SCHOOL
7 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified in the EIR. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Haringey Council
7 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about the calculations and assumptions used to determine train capacity estimates in the ‘Network North’ paper. The Department for Transport (‘the DfT’) refused to provide the requested information, citing regulations 12(4)(d) (material still in the course of completion) and 12(4)(e) (internal communications) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DfT is entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(e) to withhold the requested information. However, the DfT breached regulation 14(3) as it incorrectly issued its refusal under FOIA and not the EIR. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 12(4)(e); EIR 14(3)
View Department for Transport
7 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information in respect of domestic violence reports. The above public authority (“Lancashire Police”) relied on section 12(2) of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request.The Commissioner’s decision is that Lancashire Police was entitled to rely on section 12(2) of FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner finds that Lancashire Police has complied with its section 16 obligation to offer advice and assistance.The Commissioner also finds that Lancashire Police breached section 10(1) as it failed to respond to one request within the statutory time limit.The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 12(2); FOI 16
View Lancashire Constabulary
7 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to Regen Waste Limited’s (Regen) commercial agreements with Warrenpoint Harbour Authority. Warrenpoint Harbour Authority (WHA) disclosed part of the information but relied on the FOI and EIR access regimes to refuse to disclose the remainder of the information citing sections 43(1), 43(2), 43(3) of FOIA (commercial interest) and regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR (confidentiality of commercial or industrial information). The Commissioner’s decision is that WHA should have dealt with the entire request under the EIR access regime and therefore was entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(e) to withhold the information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a fresh response to the request at (i)(b), (i)(c), (vi) and (vii)(b-c) to confirm whether or not it holds the information.The public authority must take these steps within 30 calendar days of the date of thi
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e)
7 Aug 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to the repair or replacement of a footbridge. Armagh City Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council (the council) disclosed some of the information but withheld the remainder citing regulation 12(4)(d) (material in the course of completion) and regulation 12(3) (personal information) of the EIR as its basis for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was correct to rely on regulation 12(4)(d) and regulations 12(3) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(3); EIR 12(4)(d)
6 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
Swansea Council (the Council) withheld the information requested under regulations 12(5)(f) (the interests of the person who provided the information) and 12(5)(e) (confidentiality of commercial information). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied regulation 12(5)(f) to the request. However, the Commissioner also finds that the Council breached regulations 11 and 14 of the EIR in failing to issue a refusal notice and failing to issue an internal review within the statutory timescales. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 11; EIR 12(5)(f); EIR 14
View Swansea Council
6 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to the Government Art Collection from the Department for Culture Media and Sport (DCMS). DCMS refused to provide the information, citing section 14 (vexatious) as its basis for doing so. It upheld this at internal review.The Commissioner’s decision is that DCMS is not entitled to rely on section 14(1) in response to the complainant’s requests.The Commissioner requires DCMS to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: issue a fresh response that does not rely on section 14 as its basis to refuse to comply with the request. 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 14
View Department for Culture, Media and Sport
6 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
Summary wording for website: The complainant requested information from British Broadcasting Corporation (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 BBC
6 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about an action plan issued to The Islamic Centre Manchester charity in 2018, and details of any complaints received about the charity. The Charity Commission (‘the Commission’) initially relied on section 31(1)(g) of FOIA (law enforcement) to withhold the information requested in questions one and three and advised that it did not hold the information requested in question four of the request. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the Commission advised that it intended to release a redacted copy of the action plan, but it considered that section 31(1)(g) FOIA still applied to the redacted information. The Commission also advised that it considered that sections 40 and 41 also applied to question three of the request, as well as section 31. Sections 40 and 41 concern personal data and information provided in confidence, respectively. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Commission should disclose the redacted copy of the ac
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 17; FOI 31(1)(g)
View The Charity Commission
6 Aug 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information about a public right of way. Bridgend County Borough Council (the Council) withheld the information requested under section 22 of the FOIA. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the Council agreed that the correct access regime for the request is the EIR as opposed to the FOIA. Following a reconsideration of the request under the EIR, the Council agreed to disclose some of the information it originally withheld and stated that it was relying on regulation 12(4)(d) (material in the course of completion) to withhold other information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied regulation 12(4)(d) to some of the information. However, the Commissioner also finds that the Council has breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR in failing to provide the information it agreed was not exempt during the Commissioner’s investigation. The Commissioner requires the Council to disclose the emails to which the draft plans of t
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 5(2)
View Bridgend County Borough Council
6 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about vacant properties on regeneration estates. The London Borough of Lambeth (“LBL”) provided some information within the scope of the requests. The complainant requested an internal review and explained why they considered that the information was incomplete. After internal review, LBL argued that it was not obliged to respond to their request on the grounds that it was manifestly unreasonable (EIR regulation 12(4)(b)). The Commissioner’s decision is that LBL is not entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) as its basis for refusing to comply with the request. The Commissioner requires LBL to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide the information or explain to the complainant in a refusal notice why it is not obliged to do so for reasons other than regulation 12(4)(b). 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
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
View London Borough of Lambeth
6 Aug 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified in the EIR. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View London Borough of Lambeth