ICO The ICO has issued an enforcement notice against Hot House Roof Company ordering them to stop making nuisance marketing calls. The company had failed to honour suppression requests and repeatedly made calls to a number of individuals despite their being TPS registered.
[2014] UKICO 2014-74
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542901
ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by the Racing Post. This follows an investigation whereby the Racing Post website was subject to an internet based SQL injection attack which gave access to a customer database. The data included customer registration details relating to 677,335 data subjects.
[2014] UKICO 2014-40
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542890
ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by the Council of the Isle of Scilly. This follows an investigation into two separate incidents. The first relating to confidential information which was part of a disciplinary hearing being sent unredacted to third parties.
[2014] UKICO 2014-39
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542893
ICO An Undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by Aspers (Milton Keynes) Limited, following an email which was sent in error to an recipient outside of the organisation.
[2014] UKICO 2014-44
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542882
ICO Think W3 Limited, an online travel services company, has been served a andpound;150,000 monetary penalty after a serious breach of the Data Protection Act revealed thousands of people’s details to a malicious hacker.
[2014] UKICO 2014-35
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542888
ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by Thamesview Estate Agents Ltd after the company continued to leave papers containing personal information on the street despite a previous warning. The papers were stored in transparent bags and the information was clearly visible to anyone who walked past.
[2014] UKICO 2014-42
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542891
ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council after child’s foster placement address was disclosed in error. Investigations identified that Council had selected the correct recipient and had redacted the majority of documents disclosed however the address was missed on one document.
[2014] UKICO 2014-49
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542880
ICO An Undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by the Student Loans Company Limited following an investigation by the ICO into three separate incidents involving the disclosure of documents to the incorrect recipients. The investigation identified that whilst checking procedures were in place documents containing sensitive personal data were subject to fewer checks than those containing less sensitive data.
[2014] UKICO 2014-51
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542881
ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by The Moray Council. This follows an investigation into the loss of a file containing adoption meeting papers at a cafe in the local area.
[2014] UKICO 2014-53
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542878
ICO An undertaking to respond in a quicker and more effective manner to losses of personal data has been signed by London Borough of Barking and Dagenham. This follows an investigation into the loss of a file containing medical data relating to eleven children, which discovered that although the council knew where the file was, it had still not been retrieved five months later.
[2014] UKICO 2014-48
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542877
ICO The ICO has served, Reactiv Media Limited, with a andpound;50,000 fine after an investigation discovered they had made unsolicited calls to hundreds of people who had registered with the Telephone Preference Service (TPS).
[2014] UKICO 2014-34
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542887
ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by Department of Justice Northern Ireland. This follows the sale of a filing cabinet that contained documents originating from within the Northern Ireland Prison service. The documents contained personal data, as defined by section 1 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (the Act), which was sensitive in nature.
[2014] UKICO 2014-45
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542884
ICO The ICO has issued a andpound;70,000 fine to a Devon marketing firm responsible for hundreds of nuisance calls. The company was responsible for 630 complaints to the ICO and the TPS between 1 March 2013 and 28 February 2014. They failed to make sure that those registered with the TPS, or who’d previously asked not to be contacted, weren’t being called.
[2014] UKICO 2014-32
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542895
ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by Jephson Homes Housing Association Ltd. This follows an investigation into the disclosure in error of several documents containing third party personal data when providing documents to an individual as part of a litigation process.
[2014] UKICO 2014-47
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542885
ICO A follow up has been completed to provide an assurance that Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust has appropriately addressed the actions agreed in its undertaking signed November 2013.
[2014] UKICO 2014-52
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542876
ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council. This follows an investigation whereby a social worker had left a case file containing sensitive personal data at a client’s home. The case file outlined child welfare concerns and disclosed the identity of the source.
[2014] UKICO 2014-54
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542872
ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by Wirral Borough Council after social services records containing sensitive personal information were sent to the wrong addresses on two occasions. The information, which was disclosed in February and April 2013, included sensitive personal details relating to two families living in the borough and in one case included details of a criminal offence committed by one of the family members.
[2014] UKICO 2014-56
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542874
ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by Wokingham Borough Council, after sensitive social services records relating to the care of a young child were lost. The information, which had been requested by a family member, was lost after the delivery driver left the documents outside the requester’s home in August 2013.
[2014] UKICO 2014-55
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542875
ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust. This follows an investigation by the ICO into a series of fax related incidents which revealed that the Trust had a very low attendance rate for Information Governance training.
[2014] UKICO 2014-58
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542869
SIC Audit trail of a complaint: failure to respond within statutory timescales – On 10 March 2014, Mr King asked Highland Health Board (NHS Highland) for information about the audit trail of a complaint regarding the care and treatment of a specified person. This decision finds that NHS Highland failed to respond to Mr King’s requirement for review within the timescale allowed by the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA).
The Commissioner has ordered NHS Highland to comply with the requirement for review.
[2014] ScotIC 251 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland, Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542665
SIC Job evaluation information – On 9 April 2014, Unison asked Edinburgh Leisure for job evaluation information. Edinburgh Leisure provided some information to Unison, but withheld other information on the basis that it was either commercially sensitive or confidential.
Following an investigation, the Commissioner accepted Edinburgh Leisure’s decision to withhold information as commercially sensitive, but could not uphold its application of the exemption relating to confidentiality to benchmarking data. The Commissioner also found that part of Unison’s request was invalid because it did not adequately describe the information Unison wanted
[2014] ScotIC 254 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland, Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542677
SIC Report on job evaluation scheme – On 20 June 2014, Mr Irvine asked North Lanarkshire Council (the Council) for a copy of a report to the Council’s Corporate Management Team (CMT) concerning the Council’s job evaluation scheme.
The Council withheld the information on the basis that it was exempt from disclosure in terms of sections 30(c) and 38 of FOISA. It also told the Commissioner that it did not hold some of the information sought by Mr Irvine.
The Commissioner accepted that the Council did not hold some of the information, but noted it had failed to tell Mr Irvine that this was the case. The Commissioner accepted that the Council was entitled to withhold the personal data of employees under the exemption in section 38(1)(b) of FOISA. The Commissioner found that the Council was not entitled to withhold the remainder of the information under the exemption in section 30(c) of FOISA and required it to disclose this information to Mr Irvine.
[2014] ScotIC 253 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland, Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542667
SIC Tender Evaluation – Northern Isles Ferry Services – On 17 October 2013, Shetland Line (1984) Limited (SLL), through its solicitors, asked Transport Scotland for analysis and assessment information relating to the tenders for the Northern Isles Ferry Services (NIFS) contract. Transport Scotland provided information, redacted in terms of FOISA on the basis that various exemptions applied.
Following investigation, during which further information was disclosed, the Commissioner found that Transport Scotland was entitled to withhold the remaining information, on the basis that its disclosure would be likely to prejudice substantially the effective conduct of public affairs.
[2014] ScotIC 234 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland, Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542663
SIC Passenger numbers and income for Edinburgh Trams – On 7 July 2014, Mr Gourtsoyannis asked Transport for Edinburgh Limited (TFE) for information on passenger numbers and income for the first month of operation of the Edinburgh tram service.
TFE withheld the information under the exemption in section 33(1)(b) of FOISA because it considered disclosure would cause substantial prejudice to its commercial interests.
The Commissioner investigated and found that TFE was entitled to withhold the information under the exemption in section 33(1)(b) of FOISA.
[2014] ScotIC 256 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland, Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542670
Complaint correspondence
[2014] ScotIC 258 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542664
SIC Property recovered by the Police – On 30 May 2014, Mr Minogue asked the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Scotland (Police Scotland) for copies of all correspondence held relating to the recovery of a gold wreath. Police Scotland withheld the information on the basis that it was held for the purposes of civil proceedings brought by or on behalf of the authority.
Following an investigation the Commissioner accepted that Police Scotland was entitled to withhold the information requested by Mr Minogue.
[2014] ScotIC 250 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland, Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542671
SIC Board minutes – On 4 February 2014, Shetland Islands Council (the Council) asked Highlands and Islands Airports Limited (HIAL) for its Board minutes since 1 January 2002.
HIAL provided the Council with a copy of the minutes subject to redaction. On review, HIAL indicated that it considered the Council’s request to be invalid.
The Commissioner investigated and found that the request in question was valid. Consequently, she required HIAL to review its handling of the request and notify the Council of the outcome.
[2014] ScotIC 255 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland, Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542676
SIC Email concerning equality impact assessment – On 30 July 2014, Mr Irvine asked North Lanarkshire Council (the Council) for a specified email from the Council to Unison in 2006 concerning an equality impact assessment.
The Council withheld the information on the basis that it was exempt from disclosure in terms of section 30(c) (Prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs) of FOISA.
The Commissioner found that the Council was not entitled to withhold the information under the exemption in section 30(c) of FOISA. She required it to disclose the information to Mr Irvine.
[2014] ScotIC 259 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542668
SIC Complaint correspondence – On 17 June 2014, Ms Mackenzie asked the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Scotland (Police Scotland) for correspondence with the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC) relating to three complaints.
Police Scotland told Mr Mackenzie the information was exempt from disclosure, as it was her own personal data and as disclosure would, or would be likely to, substantially prejudice PIRC’s ongoing investigation (and thus the exercise of its functions in relation to police conduct).
Police Scotland disclosed all of the information, subject to the redaction of personal data, during this investigation. The Commissioner found that Police Scotland had been entitled to withhold the information in responding to Ms Mackenzie’s request and requirement for review.
[2014] ScotIC 252 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542673
Legal advice – sex offenders and housing applications – On 11 June 2014, Mr Howarth asked the Scottish Ministers (the Ministers) for legal advice relating to a recommendation about sex offenders applying for social rented housing.
The Ministers responded by withholding the information under section 36(1) of FOISA (as information subject to legal professional privilege). The Commissioner investigated and found that the Ministers were entitled to withhold the information under this exemption.
[2014] ScotIC 262 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland, Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542666
SIC Northern Isles Ferry Services contract: failure to respond within statutory timescales – On 16 October 2014, Shetland Line (1984) Limited (SLL) asked the Scottish Ministers (the Ministers) for information about bid proposals and other information relating to the Northern Isles Ferry Services contract. This decision finds that the Ministers failed to respond to the request within the timescale allowed by the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA). The decision also finds that the Ministers failed to comply with SLL’s requirement for review within the timescale set down by FOISA.
[2014] ScotIC 245 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland, Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542662
Audit of handling of planning application – On 4 June 2013, Ms Simpson asked Glasgow City Council (the Council) for documentation generated by the Council’s Audit and Inspection Team in relation to a particular complaint.
The Council refused to provide the information, on the basis that disclosure would substantially prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs. The Commissioner investigated and found that the Council had properly responded to Ms Simpson’s request for information.
[2014] ScotIC 244 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland, Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542660
Breakdown of statutory notice costs
[2015] ScotIC 008 – 2015
Bailii
Scotland, Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542639
On 15 September 2014, Mr A asked the Scottish Court Service (the SCS) for a copy of a report to
the Parole Board for Scotland (the PBS), together with other information about this type of report.
The SCS informed Mr A that reports of this nature are only provided to the Scottish Prison Service
(the SPS) and he was not entitled to receive a copy. Following a review, Mr A remained
dissatisfied that he had not been provided with all the information he requested, or with statutory
information advising of his rights of review and appeal.
The Commissioner investigated and found that the SCS had generally dealt with Mr A’s request for
information in accordance with Part 1 of FOISA in withholding the report. The Commissioner also
found that the SCS failed to notify Mr A that it did not hold some of the information falling within
part (ii) of his request.
The Commissioner also identified failures in the content of the initial refusal notice and the review
outcome issued by the SCS, but did not require the SCS to take any action.
[2015] ScotIC 012 – 2015
Bailii
Scotland
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542631
Communications relating to stop and search report: failure to respond within statutory timescales
[2014] ScotIC 249 – 2014
Bailii
Scotland
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542653
[2015] UKFTT 2014 – 0227 (GRC)
Bailii
Data Protection Act 1996 43
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542482
Warren TJ
[2015] UKFTT 2014 – 0122 (GRC)
Bailii
Environmental Information Regulations 2004
Information, Planning
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542483
FTTGC The Tribunal upholds the decision notice dated 31 March 2014 and dismisses the appeal on the basis that – although the requested information has subsequently been discovered and disclosed to the Appellant – Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council (DMBC) was unaware that it held the information at the time of the information request, at the time when the Information Commissioner made his decision and until the matter was appealed to the Tribunal.
[2015] UKFTT 2014 – 0107 (GRC)
Bailii
Freedom of Information Act 2000
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542201
FTTGRC Qualified exemptions – Law enforcement s.31 – Absolute exemptions – Prohibitions on disclosure s.44
Chris Ryan TJ
[2015] UKFTT 2014 – 0055 (GRC)
Bailii
Freedom of Information Act 2000 31
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542191
Dismissed – consent order
[2015] UKFTT 2014 – 0078 (GRC)
Bailii
The Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542195
FTTGC Section 35(1) FOIA formulation and development of government policy
[2015] UKFTT 2014 – 0079 (GRC)
Bailii
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542193
FTTGC (i) Whether the requested information was exempt from disclosure by virtue of s.27 (1)(b) of FOIA because its disclosure would or would be likely to Prejudice relations between the United Kingdom and an international organization, namely the Commission of the European Union and
ii) Whether, if the answer to (i) was ‘yes’, the public interest was shown to favour withholding it.
(iii) Whether the requested information was exempt by virtue of s.35 (1) (a) because it related to the formulation or development of government policy and
(iv) Whether, if it did, the public interest was shown to favour withholding it.
Held: The Tribunal concludes that neither of the exemptions relied on is engaged. It therefore allows the appeal.
The Tribunal requires the Department of Work and Pensions to provide the requested information, namely the cited letter of August, 2013, to the Appellant, Sir Roger Gale MP, within twenty – eight days of the publication of this decision.
[2015] UKFTT 2014 – 0197 (GRC)
Bailii
Freedom of Information Act 2000
England and Wales
Information, European
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542200
The Tribunal allows the Appeal in that we find in all the circumstances the request was not vexatious.
[2015] UKFTT 2014 – 0118 (GRC)
Bailii
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542198
Appeal struck out as having no reasonable prospect of succeeding
[2015] UKFTT 2014 – 0315 (GRC)
Bailii
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542190
Request for information as to development of waste incineration plant in Wales.
Chris Hughes TJ
[2015] UKFTT 2014 – 0137 (GRC)
Bailii
Environmental Information Regulations 2004
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542194
Freedom of Information Act 2000 – Appeal refused – Decision notice is correct and should stand.
Brian Kennedy QC
[2015] UKFTT 2014 – 0177 (GRC)
Bailii
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542196
The complainant made two requests for information relating to the possible restructuring and reorganising of certain departments at the University; together with information relating to discussions about and proposals for any associated redundancies. The University withheld this information under sections 36, 40 and 43. The Commissioner decided that the University had correctly relied upon section 36. In addition to this it had correctly relied upon section 40 to withhold some information. However, he has also decided that sections 40 and 43 were not engaged in relation to some of the information. Therefore some of the withheld information should be disclosed. The University also failed to meet the requirements of sections 10 and 17. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 17 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 36 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 40 – Complaint Partly Upheld
[2011] UKICO FS50346728
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.530523
The complainant requested a copy of a letter of complaint sent to the Highways Partnership, Worcestershire County Council. The request was refused under regulation 13, on the basis that it constituted the personal information of the author. After reviewing the information and receiving clarification from the authority, the Commissioner found that the authority had complied with the legislation, redaction was not possible, and therefore, the authority was correct to refuse access to the information in its entirety.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 13 – Complaint Not upheld
[2006] UKICO FER0106205
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.533541
The complainant asked the IPCC to provide a full staff list to include the positions held and contact details. The public authority initially sought to provide this information as a personal disclosure only. It later disclosed most of the information but refused to disclose the remainder using the exemptions under sections 40(2) (personal information) and 38 (health and safety) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The Commissioner’s decision is that the exemption at section 40(2) is engaged and that disclosure would breach the Data Protection Act in some cases but not in others. He also finds that the exemption at section 38 is engaged and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs that in disclosure. The complaint is partially upheld. The public authority’s handling of the request also resulted in breaches of certain procedural requirements of the Act as identified in this Notice.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 17 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 38 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld
[2011] UKICO FS50280992
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.530157
The complainant requested copies of two updated/amended pieces of legislation. The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency stated that it did not hold the information for the purposes of the FOIA, but advised that the requested information was publicly available and easily accessible and, if it was held, it would be exempt under section 21 of the FOIA. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation, the DVLA located a copy of one of the documents question which was considered to be held for the purpose of the FOIA. It disclosed the information to the complainant, but maintained that it did not hold the other document requested. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DVLA has complied with its obligations under section 1 and disclosed the information it holds relevant to the request. He does not require any steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld
[2013] UKICO FS50510335
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.528980
The University refused to respond to a request on the basis that it was vexatious.
The Commissioner investigated, but was not satisfied that the University had demonstrated that the request was vexatious. He required the University to respond otherwise than in terms of section 14(1) of FOISA.
[2020] ScotIC 032 – 2020
Bailii
Scotland
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.654005
OSCR was asked for a database of email addresses of all Scottish charities registered with it.
OSCR refused to disclose this information as some of it constituted personal data and the cost of providing the remaining information would exceed the pounds 600 cost limit.
Following an investigation, the Commissioner agreed that certain of the information was personal data and the cost of providing the email addresses without personal data would exceed the amount prescribed in the Fees Regulations (and so OSCR was not required to comply with the request).
[2020] ScotIC 049 – 2020
Bailii
Scotland
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.654011
The University refused to respond to a request on the basis that it was vexatious.
The Commissioner investigated, but was not satisfied that the University had demonstrated that the request was vexatious. He required the University to respond otherwise than in terms of section 14(1) of FOISA.
[2020] ScotIC 038 – 2020
Bailii
Scotland
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.654006
WDHSCPB was asked for information about a former medical practice.
WDHSCPB disclosed information to the Applicant for parts a. and d. of her request. It notified her that it did not hold any recorded information for parts b. and c. of the request.
The Commissioner accepted that WDHSCPB had carried out adequate searches to identify information prior to responding to part a. of the Applicant’s request. He also accepted that WDHSCPB was correct to notify the Applicant that it did not hold any information for part c. of the request.
However, he found that WDHSCPB was wrong to notify the Applicant that it held no information which would fulfil part b. of the request.
[2020] ScotIC 029 – 2020
Bailii
Scotland
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.654007
The complainant requested copies of correspondence sent between a named officer at Hastings Borough Council (the council) and a geotechnical engineering company within a specified time period. Whilst the council provided the complainant with copies of some emails, it redacted certain information which it regarded to fall outside the scope of the request. During the Commissioner’s investigation, the council confirmed that it had, in error, failed to release a copy of an email dated 23 January 2015 in response to the request. The Commissioner has decided that part of the information redacted by the council falls within the scope of the request and should have been supplied to the complainant. She also regards there to be a small amount of additional information that is relevant to the request which the council failed to consider for disclosure. It is the Commissioner’s decision that this information should also be released to the complainant. Whilst the council did provide some information to the complainant in response to his request, as it failed to do so within the prescribed 20 working days, the Commissioner has found that it has breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR. Furthermore, as the council has failed to communicate all the information to which the complainant was entitled, the Commissioner concludes that there has been a breach of regulation 5(1) of the EIR. The Commissioner requires the council to release the email dated 23 January 2015, and the additional information which has been identified as being relevant to the request.
EIR 5(1): Complaint upheld EIR 5(2): Complaint upheld
[2020] UKICO fs50845649
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.653594
The complainant requested information from the Home Office about its contacts with The Queen’s grandchildren, Zara Tindall MBE and Peter Phillips, about a named businessman. The Home Office refused to confirm or deny holding information within the scope of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office was entitled to rely on section 40(5B) (personal information) of the FOIA to neither confirm nor deny holding the requested information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
FOI 40: Complaint not upheld
[2020] UKICO fs50914167
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.653934
Allowed
[2020] UKFTT 2019 – 0365 (GRC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.649625
The complainant has requested information from Halton Borough Council which concerns live business rates accounts with a value greater than or equal to pounds 5,000. The Council has refused the complainant’s request in reliance on section 40(2) of the FOIA on the grounds that the information is the personal data of third parties, and also in reliance on section 41(1) of the FOIA, on the grounds that the requested information was provided to the Council in confidence. The Commissioner has decided that the Council is not able to rely on the exemption provided by section 40(2). This is because the recorded information does not satisfy the definition of personal data provided by the Data Protection Act 2018. However, the Commissioner has also decided that the Council has correctly applied the exemption provided by section 41 of the FOIA to the requested information.
FOI 40: Complaint upheld FOI 41: Complaint not upheld
[2020] UKICO fs50837710
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.653589
The complainant has requested communications sent between Hastings Borough Council (the council), and the owners of a local caravan park about a ‘joint cost survey’ into the stability of land which was affected by a landslip. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council is entitled to rely on regulation 12(5)(e) as its basis for withholding some of the requested information, and the public interest rests in favour of maintaining this exception. With regards to the remaining information held relevant to the request, the Commissioner has concluded that regulation 12(5)(e) is not engaged. Furthermore, the Commissioner has found that the council has breached regulation 14(2) of the EIR by failing to issue a refusal notice within 20 working days. In addition, the council has also breached regulation 11(4) of the EIR by failing to provide its internal review response within the required 40 working days. The Commissioner requires the council to disclose a redacted version of the report and correspondence which has been identified as being relevant to the request.
EIR 11(4): Complaint upheld EIR 12(5)(e): Complaint partly upheld EIR 14(2): Complaint upheld
[2020] UKICO fer0852865
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.653591
[2012] UKFTT EA – 2012 – 0056
Bailii
The Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.578400
The complainant has made a request to Newcastle City Council (‘the council’) for information relating to comments, feedback, issues and complaints deriving from specific addresses since 1962. The council refused to comply with the request on the basis that to do so would exceed the appropriate limit in costs set by section 12(1) of the Freedom of Information Act (‘the FOIA’). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council correctly applied section 12(1). Additionally, the Commissioner found that the council had complied with section 16(1) by providing appropriate advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
FOI 12: Not upheld
[2015] UKICO FS50565952
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.555516
The complainant has made two requests, on separate dates, for all communications between Hambleton District Council (the council) and an individual, that individuals business and its representatives. The council responded to the two requests separately, but provided the same response to both in that it was withholding the information under regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR and could neither confirm nor deny any further communications taking place. Relying on regulation 13(5) of the EIR and 40(5)(b) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), as it considered it would reveal the personal data of the named individual. The complainant is not satisfied with the council refusing his request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has correctly relied on regulation 12(5)(b) and was right to neither confirm nor deny the existence of any other communications taking place for both requests. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2015/0064 settled by consent.
EIR 12(5)(b): Not upheld
[2015] UKICO FS50554256
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.555094
The complainant has requested information from the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (‘the Council’) relating to the number of reported leaking roofs at Estella House in Henry Dickens Court and the remainder of the estate. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has provided the complainant with all the information it holds that falls within the scope of his request. He has also determined that the Council is under no duty to provide substitute reference numbers to the information that has been redacted and disclosed. However the Council incorrectly handled the request under the FOIA. The Commissioner has determined that the request is for environmental information and should therefore have been considered under the EIR. In wrongly handling the request under the FOIA, the Council has breached regulation 14(1) of the EIR. As the Commissioner upholds the Council’s position that no further information is held, he requires the Council to take no steps.
EIR 12(4)(a): Not upheld EIR 14(1): Upheld
[2015] UKICO FS50558636
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.555526
The complainant requested a copy of correspondence sent by a third party to Prestatyn Town Council (‘the Council’). The Council withheld the information requested under sections 40(1) and 40(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied section 40(1) to the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken. However, further commentary on the implication of the Commissioner’s finding in relation to the Council’s obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998 is set out in the ‘Other Matters’ section at the end of the Notice.
FOI 40: Not upheld
[2015] UKICO FS50572286
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.555525
The complainant has requested information relating to planning permission for a specific address, including any complaints or representations received by South Hams District Council. South Hams District Council has disclosed some information, explained that some information is available on its website and has refused to disclose some of the requested information citing the exceptions at regulation 12(5)(b) – adverse effect to the course of justice and regulation 13 – personal data. The Commissioner’s decision is that South Hams District Council has, in accordance with regulation 5(1) disclosed all of the information it holds which has not been excepted but in disclosing some information outside of the statutory time limit, has breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR. He considers that in failing to conduct an internal review within 40 working days it has also breached regulation 11(4) but that it has correctly withheld information in accordance with regulations 12(5)(b) and 13. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps.
EIR 5(2): Upheld EIR 11(4): Upheld EIR 12(5)(b): Not upheld EIR 13: Not upheld
[2015] UKICO FER0577322
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.555856
[2014] UKFTT EA – 2013 – 0228 (GRC
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.521539
[2014] UKFTT 2014 – 0042 (GRC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.526466
[2014] UKFTT EA – 2013 – 0220 (GRC
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.521954
The Claimant is a 16-year-old boy. In December 2015, when he was 11 years old, an online tutor raised certain concerns about his alleged behaviour with the Department for Education. In accordance with the Prevent Strategy, the matter was referred to the Metropolitan Police. On 20 June 2016, the case was closed by the Defendant’s local Prevent panel. The Claimant challenges a decision made by the Defendant on 26 April 2019 to retain the Claimant’s personal data, refusing his mother’s requests for such material to be deleted.
The Honourable Mrs Justice Steyn DBE
[2020] EWHC 2528 (Admin)
Bailii
Data Protection Act 2018
England and Wales
Information, Police
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.654986
The complainant has requested information relating to the re-opening of the campus during the covid-19 pandemic. The Commissioner’s decision is that the University of Sheffield (‘the university’) failed to respond to the request for information within 20 working days and has therefore breached section 10 (time for compliance with the request) of the FOIA. The Commissioner is satisfied that the university has now provided a response to the request. Therefore the Commissioner does not require the university to take any further steps in relation to this request for information.
FOI 10: Complaint upheld
[2021] UKICO IC-63496
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.669597
The complainant has requested copies of a number of reports produced by the Extremism Analysis Unit. The Home Office refused the request, citing the exemptions provided by sections 35(1)(a) (formulation or development of government policy), 24 (national security), 27 (international relations), 31 (law enforcement), 38 (health and safety) and 40 (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office was entitled to rely on section 35(1)(a) of the FOIA to refuse to disclose the requested information.
FOI 35: Complaint not upheld
[2020] UKICO fs50881024
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 25 December 2021; Ref: scu.651512
[2020] UKICO fs50910198
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 25 December 2021; Ref: scu.653721
The complainant has requested Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Clinical Commissioning Group (the CCG) to disclose information relating to an IT trainer vacancy; information including the application forms and supporting information of all those shortlisted, the completed interview question, answer sheets and scorecards for those shortlisted, whether the preferred candidate had previous NHS experience or connections with the CCG and whether they started on the opening salary for the grade. The CCG disclosed some information to the complainant, cited section 12 for one element of the request and refused to disclose the remainder under section 40 of the FOIA. During the Commissioner’s investigation the CCG withdrew it application of section 12 and disclosed the requested information to the complainant. In relation to this element of the request, the Commissioner has recorded a breach of section 1 and 10 of the FOIA, as the CCG failed to disclose information to which the complainant was entitled within 20 working days of receipt. In relation to the application of section 40 of the FOIA, the Commissioner’s decision is that the CCG is entitled to withhold the remaining requested information in under this exemption. The Commissioner does not require the CCG to take any further action.
FOI 10: Complaint upheld FOI 40: Complaint not upheld FOI 1: Complaint upheld
[2020] UKICO fs50861656
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 25 December 2021; Ref: scu.653556
This appeal is struck out under rule 8(2)(a) as the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction in this matter.
[2015] UKFTT 2014 – 0312 (GRC)
Bailii
Information
Updated: 25 December 2021; Ref: scu.541430
Application to GMC for records of the race of doctors subject to complaints made by the local NHS trust.
[2014] UKFTT 2014 – 0103 (GRC)
Bailii
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Information
Updated: 25 December 2021; Ref: scu.541429
The claimant had sought information from several public bodies as to his late wife to support his probate dispute. The police had rejected this request as vexatios, and he now appealed against the upholding of that decision by the respondent.
[2014] UKFTT 2014 – 0184 (GRC)
Bailii
Information
Updated: 25 December 2021; Ref: scu.541423
Dismissed The Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009
[2014] UKFTT 2014 – 0172 (GRC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 25 December 2021; Ref: scu.541428
Application by the Defendant to strike out the claim or for summary judgment in her favour of the claim brought by the Claimant in libel and Data Protection.
Sir Andrew Nicol
[2021] EWHC 3026 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales
Information, Defamation
Updated: 25 December 2021; Ref: scu.670245
Salary details of a named employee
[2010] ScotIC 216 – 2010
Bailii
Scotland
Information
Updated: 25 December 2021; Ref: scu.433942
Summer 2010 Cabinet tour
[2010] ScotIC 217 – 2010
Bailii
Scotland
Information
Updated: 25 December 2021; Ref: scu.433937
[2014] UKFTT EA – 2013 – 0110 (GRC
Bailii
England and Wales
Information
Updated: 25 December 2021; Ref: scu.521528