8 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to any form of contact made by Kent Police on a specified date and location, including a time parameter, with various listed groups of individuals as well as a named individual. Kent Police would neither confirm nor deny (‘NCND’) holding any information by virtue of sections 30(3) (investigations and proceedings) and 40(5) (personal information) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Kent Police was entitled to rely on section 30(3) of FOIA to refuse the request. As he has found section 30(3) to be engaged, the Commissioner has not deemed it necessary to consider Kent Police’s reliance on section 40(5) of FOIA. No steps are required as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30
View Kent Police
8 Jul 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant sought information from London Borough of Lambeth (“the Council”) regarding a redevelopment project. The Council provided some redacted information to the complainant, however it refused to disclose the remainder (“the withheld information”) citing regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR as a basis for non-disclosure.The Commissioner’s decision is that at the time of the request the Council was entitled to withhold the withheld information, which concerns commercial interests. The Council correctly applied regulation 12(5)(e), however it breached regulation 14(3) of the EIR as it incorrectly issued its refusal notice under FOIA and not the EIR.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(e); EIR 14(3)
View London Borough of Lambeth
5 Jul 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
View Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
5 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about membership of the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) for specific Council staff. North Yorkshire Council (the Council) confirmed that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1)
View North Yorkshire County Council
5 Jul 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)
View Kent County Council
5 Jul 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) is entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the request for correspondence about the transfer of SeAH Steel Holdings monopile factory as complying with it would exceed the appropriate cost limit. However, DLUHC didn’t comply with its obligation under section 16(1), which concerns advice and assistance. The Commissioner requires DLUHC to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: In line with section 16(1) of FOIA, either indicate to the complainant the terms of a refined request for information with which DLUHC might be able to comply within the cost limit or confirm to them that the current request can’t be meaningfully refined.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
4 Jul 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, London Borough of Hillingdon (‘the Council’) holds no further information within scope of the request for a lease. The Council didn’t comply with section 1(1) or 10(1) of FOIA, however, as it didn’t communicate the relevant information it holds within the required timescale. It’s not necessary for the Council to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1(1); FOI 10(1)
View Hillingdon Council
4 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the number of different languages spoken or written by BBC staff. The BBC initially advised the complainant that it did not hold the requested information, however at internal review the BBC advised that it was relying on section 12(2) for part of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 12(2) of FOIA is not engaged. However, the BBC is entitled to refuse to comply with the request under section 12(1) of FOIA as to do so would exceed the appropriate cost limit. The Commissioner also finds that there was no breach of section 16 of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12; FOI 16
View BBC
4 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Lancashire County Council (“the Council”). The Commissioner disclosed some information, however it refused to disclose the remainder. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to refuse to disclose the remaining requested information in accordance with section 12(1) (cost limit) of the FOIA.The Commissioner also finds that the Council provided reasonable advice and assistance and therefore met its obligations under section 16(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16
View Lancashire County Council
4 Jul 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has made multiple requests for information to the University of Manchester (‘the University’). The University refused all the requests, citing section 14(1) (vexatious requests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the University was entitled to refuse requests two to five as vexatious. It has failed, however, to demonstrate why request one is vexatious. The Commissioner requires the University to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide a response to request one that doesn’t rely on section 14(1). 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(1)
View The University of Manchester
4 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) is entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the multi-part request for Data Protection Impact Assessments as complying with it would exceed the appropriate cost limit. There was no breach of section 16(1), which concerns advice and assistance. It’s not necessary for the DLUHC to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 12(1); FOI 16(1)
View Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
4 Jul 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to policy and procedures for Cleveland Police staff members. The Commissioner’s decision is that Cleveland Police breached section 10(1) of FOIA by failing to provide a response within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10
View Cleveland Police
4 Jul 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
View Trafford Council
4 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a copy of a recording of a zoom meeting held by Culturally Chard. Chard Town Council (“the council”) refused the request on the basis that section 40(2) of FOIA applies (personal data of third parties). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council was not correct to apply section 40(2) to withhold the information from disclosure. The Commissioner requires the council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.To disclose the requested information to the complainant.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
4 Jul 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has submitted a request to the London Borough of Barnet (the council) for information relating to the validity and enforcement of a historic Deed of Agreement.The Commissioner’s decision is that regulation 12(5)(b)(the course of justice) is engaged. However, he finds that the public interest in maintaining the exception does not outweigh the public interest in disclosure. He also finds that the council breached regulations 14(3) and 11(4) of the EIR in its handling of the complainant’s request.The Commissioner requires the council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation:• Disclose the requested information, with any personal data redacted in accordance with his guidance. The public authority must take this step within 30 calendar days of the date of this decision. 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
Exemptions cited: EIR 11(4); EIR 12(5)(b); EIR 14(3)
View Barnet Council
4 Jul 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested a copy of a report assessing the risks associated with ‘volumetric’ modular construction that is held by the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC). The DLUHC issued a refusal notice in response to the complainant’s request, citing section 35(1)(a)(formulation of government policy) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). The Commissioner’s decision is that the complainant’s request is for environmental information, and therefore should have been considered under the EIR. The Commissioner requires the DLUHC to reconsider the complainant’s request under the EIR, and either provide the requested information, or issue a refusal notice citing a valid exception.
Exemptions cited: FOI 35(1)
View Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
3 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of agreements between financial services companies. The above public authority relied on section 44 of FOIA to withhold the information as disclosure would be prohibited by another piece of legislation. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority is entitled to rely on section 44 of FOIA to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Keywords: Financial Service and Markets Act FSMA, confidential information
Exemptions cited: FOI 44
View Financial Conduct Authority
3 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information held by Oxford Direct Services Limited (ODSL) that relates to disciplinary action taken against any employees investigated for, and found to have committed, fraud against ODSL. The Commissioner’s decision is that ODSL is entitled to rely on the exemption at section 40(2) (personal information) of FOIA, as its basis for refusing the complainant’s request.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
3 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested a copy of a particular file the Cabinet Office holds on the deceased businessman, Ian Stuart Spiro. The Cabinet Office applied sections 23(1) (information supplied by, or relating to, bodies dealing with security matters) and 24(1)(national security) of FOIA, in the alternative, to refuse the request.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office was entitled to apply sections 23(1) and 24(1) in the alternative, to withhold the requested information.The Commissioner requires no steps as a result of this decision. Information Tribunal appeal UA-2024-001626-GIA PTA refused.
Exemptions cited: FOI 23; FOI 24
View Cabinet Office
3 Jul 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information on the Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP) machine learning Universal Credit anti-fraud models. DWP disclosed some information but withheld the remainder under section 31(1)(a), prevention or detection of crime. The Commissioner’s decision is that DWP is entitled to rely on section 31(1)(a) to withhold the remaining information. The Commissioner finds, however, that DWP breached section 10(1) by disclosing further information outside of the statutory timeframe. The Commissioner does not require DWP to take further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 31
View Department for Work and Pensions
3 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the cervical screening programme in relation to a specific laboratory. NHSE disclosed some information, confirmed it didn’t hold other information and withheld the remainder under section 40(2) and 41 of FOIA. These exemptions concern personal data and information provided in confidence, respectively. The Commissioner’s decision is that the information NHSE is withholding is personal data that can be withheld under section 40(2) of FOIA. It’s not necessary for NHSE to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View NHS England
3 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from West Devon Borough Council (“the Council”) relating to a specific planning application. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(e) (internal communications) of the EIR to refuse to provide the withheld information. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0292 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(e)
View West Devon Borough Council
2 Jul 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant submitted a number of requests about estate service charges for a housing estate and about the landscaping service provided by Lambeth Parks. The London Borough of Lambeth (“the Council”) provided the complainant with some information by response, however stated that further recorded information within scope of the complainant’s requests was not held. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the Council sought to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) to refuse the complainant’s requests for information about Lambeth Pars/Landscapes. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is not entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) to refuse the complainant’s requests for information about Lambeth Parks/Landscapes dated 17 July 2023, 15 August 2023, 17 September 2023, and 29 September 2023. The Commissioner requires the Council to issue the complainant with a fresh response to each of the requests that does not rely on regulation 12(4)(b). The public authority must take th
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b)
View London Borough of Lambeth
2 Jul 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information about the grassed areas in the Penmaen Ward. Caerphilly County Borough Council (the Council) initially applied section 12 (appropriate limit) of the FOIA to the requests as it considered compliance would exceed the appropriate limit. In its internal review the Council stated that it did not hold the information requested. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the Council revised its position again and maintained that section 12 of the FOIA applied to the requests. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to consider the combined cost of responding to both requests and that it has reasonably estimated the combined cost as exceeding the appropriate limit. Consequently, the Council was entitled to refuse to comply with the requests in accordance with section 12(1). However, the Commissioner finds that the Council breached section 16(1) of the FOIA as it failed to provide sufficient advice and assistance to the compla
Exemptions cited: FOI 10; FOI 12; FOI 16
View Caerphilly County Borough Council
2 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about the number of user sessions affected by the presence of a Meta Pixel application on Northampton General Hospital Trust’s website. Northampton General Hospital Trust (‘the Trust’) has stated that it does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Trust does not hold the requested information under section 1(1)(a) FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View NORTHAMPTON GENERAL HOSPITAL NHS TRUST
2 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information about pension payments and the operation of the BBC Pension Scheme. The BBC provided a response to the first part of the request. It refused the remainder of the request stating that the requested information was held on behalf of BBC Pensions and was not held for the BBC’s own purposes. The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is not held by the BBC as per section 3(2) of FOIA – Information held on behalf of. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 3
View BBC
2 Jul 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested specified emails and documents relating to internal FOI handling correspondence. The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) refused to comply with the request, citing section 14(1) (vexatious request) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the AGO was not entitled to rely on section 14(1). The Commissioner requires the AGO to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide the requested information or issue an appropriate refusal notice which does not rely on section 14(1).
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
View Attorney General's Office
2 Jul 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information about sewage treatment works using continuous monitoring devices, and water quality. Thames Water Utilities Limited (TWL) applied regulations 12(4)(a) and 12(4)(b) to the request which concern information that’s not held and manifestly unreasonable requests, respectively. The Commissioner’s decision is as follows: Regulation 12(4)(a) isn’t engaged but the request engages regulation 12(4)(b) and the public interest favours maintaining this exception. TWL complied with its duty under regulation 9(1) to offer advice and assistance. It’s not necessary for TWL to take any steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(b); EIR 9; FOI 12
2 Jul 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested information relating to parents prosecuted pursuant to the Children and Young Persons Act 1933. The Chief Constable of Essex Police 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 Essex Police
2 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested information relating to public spaces protection orders (‘PSPOs’) from South Kesteven District Council (‘the Council’). The Council provided some information but said that it did not hold the information requested in parts (1) and (3) of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold the remaining information.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(a)
View South Kesteven District Council
2 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested copies of “Assessment of a Request for Prospective Authorisation of a Regulatory In Vivo Test ” forms from the Home Office. The Home Office disclosed some information but withheld the remainder, citing sections 44(1) (Prohibitions on disclosure), 40(2) (Personal information) and 38(1) (Health and safety) of FOIA; it also advised that one form could not be located. The complainant agreed that any information withheld under sections 40 and 38 of FOIA could be properly withheld. The Commissioner has considered the applicability of section 44(1) of FOIA and whether or not the missing form is held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, the form that could not be located is not held. He also finds that, where cited, section 44 is properly engaged. The Commissioner does not require any steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0288 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 44
View Home Office
2 Jul 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from West Lancashire Borough Council (“the Council”) relating to Ormskirk Bus Station Toilets. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is not entitled to rely on section 41(1) (information provided in confidence) to withhold the requested information. However, he also finds that the Council is entitled to rely on section 40(2) (personal information) to withhold some information. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the withheld information making appropriate personal data redactions as described in paragraph 24 of this notice. The Council must take these steps within 30 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making 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 40(2); FOI 41
View West Lancashire Borough Council
2 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested contracts between Network Rail and a third party. Network Rail disclosed the contracts, with information withheld under section 43(2) (commercial interests). The Commissioner’s decision is that the withheld information engages section 43(2) and the public interest lies in maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 43(2)
View Network Rail
1 Jul 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
1 Jul 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant has requested TfL to disclose the name of the company it is using for security of its ULEZ (Ultra Low Emission Zone) camera vans. TfL refused to disclose the information citing regulation 12(5)(a) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that TfL is entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(a) of the EIR. He has however recorded a breach of regulation 14(2) by failing to issue its refusal notice within 20 working days of the receipt of the request. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(5)(a); EIR 14
View Transport for London
1 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to . The University of Hull (“the University”) relied on section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious) to refuse the request.The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was vexatious and therefore the University was entitled to rely upon section 14(1) of FOIA to refuse it. The Commissioner does not require any steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14
1 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested “information rights” information held in relation to “a:gender”. The Home Office initially cited section 12(2) of FOIA – the cost of compliance. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the Home Office revised its position and said that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Home Office does not hold the information requested by the complainant. No steps are required as a result of this notice.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Home Office
1 Jul 2024Complaint partially upheldFreedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested NHSE to disclose information around the testing, short and long term effects and obtaining informed consent for COVID-19 vaccines. NHSE confirmed that it does not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities NHSE does not hold the requested information. He has however recorded a breach of section 10 of FOIA, for failing to respond to the request within 20 working days of receipt. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1; FOI 10
View NHS England
1 Jul 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested statistics relating to the managed migration of benefit claimants to Universal Credit. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has breached section 16(1) of FOIA as the request did not have a single objective reading and DWP did not seek clarification of the request under section 1(3) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires DWP to provide the complainant with advice and assistance by requesting clarification of 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 16
View Department for Work and Pensions
1 Jul 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested correspondence from the Department for Business and Trade (“DBT”), that were sent or received by Ed Davey and related to the Post Office Horizon IT news item of interest. The Commissioner’s decision is that DBT holds one further document located during its additional searches following the Commissioner’s investigation. DBT, on the balance of probabilities, does not hold any further additional information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner requires DBT to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the further document identified or issue an appropriate refusal notice which complies with FOIA. DBT 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 Department for Business and Trade
1 Jul 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). By the date of this notice DCMS had not issued a substantive response to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that DCMS 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 DCMS 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. DCMS 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 contemp
Exemptions cited: FOI 17(3)
View Department for Culture, Media and Sport
1 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information relating to parking enforcement. Brighton & Hove City Council (the “Council”) disclosed some information and confirmed that further information was not held. The complainant believes that the Council holds additional information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has provided the complainant with all the relevant information that it holds. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0285 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 1
View Brighton and Hove City Council
1 Jul 2024Complaint upheld (body must disclose)Environmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Ealing (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 regulation 5(2) of the EIR.The Commissioner requires the the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the EIR. 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 Freedom of Information Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(2)
View Ealing Council
1 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information, including policies and procedures, relating to a named investigation. Cleveland Police denied holding some information within the scope of the request and refused to disclose the remainder, citing sections 31(1)(a) and (b) (law enforcement) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Cleveland Police does not hold information in scope of the first part of the request and was entitled to rely on sections 31(1)(a) and (b) of FOIA to withhold the information inscope of the second part of the request. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
Exemptions cited: FOI 31
View Cleveland Police
1 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested information from Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council (“the Council”) relating to its freedom of information database. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on section 14(1) (vexatious request) of FOIA to refuse to provide the requested information. However, he finds the Council breached section 10(1) (time for compliance) by failing to respond to the request within the statutory timeframe of 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take steps.
Exemptions cited: FOI 14(1)
View Oldham Council
1 Jul 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant requested information from Oxfordshire County Council (“the Council”) relating to highways maintenance records relating to a specific road. The Council disclosed some information within the scope of the request. The complainant believes the Council holds additional information within the scope of the request. The Council’s position was that it had disclosed all of the information it held within the scope of the request, however, during the course of the Commissioner’s investigation is has identified and disclosed some further information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council has now identified all of the information it holds within the scope of the request. However, the Commissioner also finds that the Council failed to respond to the request in full within 20 working days and has therefore breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
Exemptions cited: EIR 5(1); EIR 5(2)
View Oxfordshire County Council
1 Jul 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested from the London Borough of Redbridge (”the Council”) all copies of Penalty Charge Notices (“PCN”) issued by Civil Enforcement Officers on 27 and 28 February 2023 within specified timeframes around Torbitt Way and William Torbitt Primary School.The Council refused to provide information within the scope of the request citing section 40(2)(personal information of third party) of FOIA.The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to refuse to disclose the requested information by virtue of section 40(2) of FOIA.The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further steps. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0284 under appeal.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40(2)
View Redbridge Council
28 Jun 2024Complaint partially upheldEnvironmental Information Regulations 2004
The complainant submitted a request to the London Borough of Islington (the Council) seeking information about the Barnsbury and Laycock Liveable Neighbourhood scheme. The Council provided the complainant with some information falling within the scope of the request. However it withheld some further information on the basis of regulation 12(4)(d) (material in the course of completion, unfinished documents and incomplete data) and some further information on the basis of regulation 12(4)(e) (internal communications). The Commissioner’s decision is that the information withheld on the basis of regulation 12(4)(d) is exempt from disclosure on the basis of this provision, but that in all the circumstances of the case the public interest favours disclosure of this information; and, that the information withheld on the basis of regulation 12(4)(e) is exempt from disclosure on the basis of this provision, and that in all the circumstances of the case the public interest favours withholding th
Exemptions cited: EIR 12(4)(d); EIR 12(4)(e)
View Islington Council
28 Jun 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant has requested, from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), “a copy of the CPS written decision” relating to a specified investigation. CPS refused to confirm or deny holding information, citing section 30(3) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that CPS was correct to cite section 30(3) and neither confirm nor deny (NCND) holding information. The Commissioner doesn’t require any steps as a result of this decision notice. Information Tribunal FT/EA/2024/0264 appeal dismissed.
Exemptions cited: FOI 30
View Crown Prosecution Service
27 Jun 2024Complaint not upheld (refusal valid)Freedom of Information Act 2000
The complainant requested copies of the minutes of the Governing Body at Ysgol Friars (the School) which dealt specifically with two employment tribunal cases. The School provided copies of the minutes in question, subject to some information being redacted under section 40(2) (personal information) and section 44 (prohibitions on disclosure). During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the School withdrew its reliance on section 44 of the FOIA but maintained the section 40(2) applied to the request. The School stated that it also considered some of the withheld information to be exempt under section 41 (information provided in confidence) and section 42 (legal professional privilege). The Commissioner’s decision is that the School has correctly applied section 40(2) to all of the withheld information. He does not require any steps to be taken.
Exemptions cited: FOI 40