Category: Information

Greater Manchester Police (Police and Criminal Justice): ICO 14 Mar 2017

The complainant has requested copies of the training materials used by Greater Manchester Police (‘GMP’) in its Workshop to Raise Awareness of Prevent (‘WRAP’) training sessions. GMP refused to disclose this information under the exemptions provided by sections 24(1) (national security), 31(1) (law enforcement) and 40 (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that GMP was entitled to rely on section 24(1) to refuse to disclose the requested information. However, she found procedural breaches relating to the time GMP took to deal with the request and the internal review.
FOI 10: Upheld FOI 24: Not upheld

Citations:

[2017] UKICO FS50632283

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583738

General Dental Council (Local Government (Other)) FS50639736: ICO 2 Mar 2017

ICO The complainant has requested information relating to the Hudson report and the Professional Standards Association report. The GDC provided the complainant with some of the information she requested, it applied section 12 FOIA to parts of the request and refused to provide some information under section 42 FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the GDC was correct to apply section 12 FOIA and that it was not therefore obliged to comply with the request. It did not however provide the complainant with appropriate advice and assistance in accordance with its obligations under section 16 FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide the complainant with advice and assistance in accordance with the GDC’s obligations under section 16 FOIA.
FOI 12: Not upheld

Citations:

[2017] UKICO FS50639736

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583735

Durham County Council (Local Government (County Council)) FS50648453: ICO 14 Mar 2017

ICO The complainant has requested information relating to a specific planning application. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, Durham County Council does not hold further information relevant to this request. She does not require any steps to be taken to ensure compliance with the legislation.
EIR 5: Not upheld

Citations:

[2017] UKICO FS50648453

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583725

Durham County Council (Local Government (County Council)) FS50643126: ICO 14 Mar 2017

The complainant has requested all reports made prior to November 27 2015 to the Corporate Management team of Durham County Council relating to proposals to change the contracts of classroom assistants in County Durham. The Commissioner’s decision is that Durham County Council has correctly applied the exemption at section 36(2)(b)(i) where disclosure would, or would be likely to, inhibit the free and frank provision of advice. She does not require the public authority to take the any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
FOI 36: Not upheld

Citations:

[2017] UKICO FS50643126

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583724

Cromer Town Council (Local Government (Town Council)): ICO 13 Mar 2017

ICO The complainant has made two requests for information to Cromer Town Council. In the first request the complainant seeks information relating to a legal dispute which the Council had been engaged in. The second request concerns information which relates to a Police Information Notice issued to a third party following a complaint made to the Police by the Town Clerk. The Council has refused to comply with both requests in reliance on section 14(1) of the FOIA on the grounds that they are vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that Cromer Town Council is entitled to rely on section 14(1) of the FOIA.
FOI 14: Not upheld

Citations:

[2017] UKICO FS50649446

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583708

BBC (Other) FS50644978: ICO 23 Mar 2017

In two requests, the complainant has requested information from the BBC about incidents of inappropriate sexual behaviour and incidents of nudity. The BBC provided the complainant with web links to where some information relating to the first request is published. It withheld some information under section 22(1) of the FOIA because this information was intended for future publication. With regard to the second request, the BBC initially said it holds no relevant information. During the Commissioner’s investigation the BBC confirmed that it was not obliged to comply with the second request because to establish whether or not it holds relevant information would exceed the appropriate cost limit under section 12(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the BBC: correctly applied section 22(1) to Request 1 and that the public interest favoured maintaining the exemption; is not obliged to confirm or deny it holds information within the scope of Request 2 as to do so would exceed the appropriate limit under section 12(2) of the FOIA; but breached section 16(1) with regard to Request 2 because it did not offer appropriate advice and assistance. The Commissioner requires the BBC to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: provide the complainant with appropriate advice and assistance in accordance with its obligations under section 16(1) of the FOIA.
FOI 12: Not upheld FOI 16: Upheld FOI 22: Not upheld

Citations:

[2017] UKICO FS50644978

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583692

Cromer Town Council (Local Government (Town Council)) FS50638372: ICO 13 Mar 2017

ICO The complainant has submitted a request recorded information from Cromer Town Council. The ambit of the complainant’s request is particularly wide since it relates to litigation between the Council and Hoyl Group Limited concerning the right of access to the basement flat at North Lodge. The Council refused the complainant’s request in reliance on section 14(1) on the grounds that the request is vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that Cromer Town Council has properly applied section 14(1) to the complainant’s request. She finds that the complainant’s request for information is vexatious and consequently the Council is not obliged to comply with the provisions of section 1 of the FOIA.
FOI 14: Not upheld

Citations:

[2017] UKICO FS50638372

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583707

BBC (Other) FS50669615: ICO 23 Mar 2017

The complainant has requested information about complaints of bias. The BBC explained that the information was covered by the derogation and excluded from FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that this information was held by the BBC for the purposes of ‘journalism, art or literature’ and did not fall within the scope of FOIA. He therefore upholds the BBC’s position and requires no remedial steps to be taken in this case.
FOI 1: Not upheld

Citations:

[2017] UKICO FS50669615

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583693

Cabinet Office (Central Government) FS50653082: ICO 23 Mar 2017

ICO The complainant submitted a request to the public authority for information relating to changes to the Civil Service Compensation Scheme. The public authority published some of the information held within the scope of the request following the application of the exemption contained at section 22(1) FOIA to that information. It withheld the remaining information in reliance on the exemptions contained at sections 35(1)(a), 40(2) and 43(2) FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to rely on the exemption contained at section 35(1)(a) FOIA as the basis for withholding the remaining information held within the scope of the request.
FOI 35: Not upheld

Citations:

[2017] UKICO FS50653082

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583700

Cabinet Office (Central Government) FS50654647: ICO 23 Mar 2017

ICO The complainant has requested information from the Cabinet Office. He is sight impaired and does not have ready access to the internet. The complainant also had difficulty in drawing this directly to the Cabinet Office’s attention. He raised concerns with the Commissioner about the difficulties he experienced in making this request. Once the Commissioner drew this matter to Cabinet Office’s attention, it took steps to improve its processes. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office contravened the requirements of section 16 of the FOIA (advice and assistance) when handling this request. No steps are required.
FOI 13: Upheld

Citations:

[2017] UKICO FS50654647

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583701

BBC (Other): ICO 30 Mar 2017

The complainant has requested information relating to taxi expenses. The BBC provided the complainant with some information but said that some of the information was covered by the derogation and excluded from FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that this information was held by the BBC for the purposes of ‘journalism, art or literature’ and did not fall within the scope of FOIA. She therefore upholds the BBC’s position and requires no remedial steps to be taken in this case.
FOI 1: Not upheld

Citations:

[2017] UKICO FS50672644

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583694

Queens College (Decision Notice): ICO 8 Aug 2011

The complainant made two sets of requests to the Queen’s College for information principally relating to the proposed sale of land at Keresley, which formed part of larger plans for a residential development. The public authority responded by stating that, for most parts of the request, it did not hold recorded information. Where any information did exist, though, the public authority claimed that this was commercially sensitive and so would not be released. As part of his investigation, the Commissioner has asked the public authority to clarify the particular access-regime it was considering the requests under and to identify the specific exemption or exception that it was relying on in order to withhold requested information. The Commissioner has determined that the public authority correctly cited regulation 12(4)(d) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR) to some of the requested information. However, the Commissioner has found that the public authority failed to support its application of regulations 12(4)(b) and 12(5)(e) of the EIR and sections 21 and 43 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to other parts of the information it holds. He therefore requires the disclosure of this information. Furthermore, the Commissioner considers that the public authority breached regulations 5 and 14 of the EIR and sections 1 and 17 of the Act.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 17 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 21 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 43 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 5 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 5 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 12.4.b – Complaint Upheld, EIR 12.4.d – Complaint Partly Upheld, EIR 12.5.e – Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2011] UKICO FER0322910

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.530781

Environment Agency (Decision Notice): ICO 17 Feb 2009

The complainant wrote to the Environment Agency to request information regarding the Hendon Sewage Treatment Works. The Environment Agency refused the request under section 14 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 on the grounds that it was vexatious. The complainant subsequently complained to the Commissioner who found that the request was for environmental information and therefore should have been administered under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR). The Commissioner has investigated the complaint and found that the public authority was not obliged to comply with the request as it was manifestly unreasonable under regulation 12(4)(b). By failing to deal with the request under the EIR the public authority breached regulation 14(2) and 14(3) but the Commissioner requires no steps to be taken. Information Tribunal appeal number EA/2009/0018 dismissed.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 12.4.b – Complaint Not upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2009] UKICO FER0230659

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.531930

Environment Agency (Decision Notice): ICO 4 Nov 2013

The complainant has requested information from the Environment Agency (EA) regarding any communications between and about the landowners in connection with a particular planning application. The Commissioner’s decision is that Environment Agency has successfully applied Regulation 13 of the EIR to the requested information it has either redacted or withheld. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 13 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2013] UKICO FER0479686

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.528873

Financial Ombudsman Service (Other): ICO 27 Feb 2020

The complainant has requested information from the FOS in the form of recorded estimates as to how much time was spent on his complaint to it and information regarding the qualifications of the specific ombudsman who dealt with the complaint. The FOS stated that it did not hold recorded information in relation to time estimates, however it did provide the complainant with a link to its annual report and accounts and later with information as to what actions were undertaken regarding his specific complaint. In relation to the qualifications of the ombudsman, the FOS refused to confirm or deny whether it held such information, citing section 40(5) of the FOIA as a basis for this. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FOS is entitled to refuse to confirm or deny whether it holds the relevant requested information. The Commissioner also finds that the FOS breached sections 1(1) and 1(1)(b) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
FOI 40(5): Complaint not upheld

Citations:

[2020] UKICO fs50853126

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.653488

BBC (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Sep 2013

The complainant has requested the audience research to support the broadcasting of cricket on Radio 4 long wave. The BBC explained the information was covered by the derogation and excluded from FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that this information was held by the BBC for the purposes of ‘journalism, art or literature’ and did not fall inside FOIA. He therefore upholds the BBC’s position and requires no remedial steps to be taken in this case.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2013] UKICO FS50508220

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.528632

Stunt v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 6 Apr 2017

The Court was asked whether section 32(4) of the Act, which provides in certain circumstances for an automatic stay of proceedings in respect of journalistic materials (amongst others), is incompatible with EU law.
Held: The sub section forms an important part of the protection of the rights of freedom of expression. A greater need is to be shown to allow prior restraint of a journalists publicatuon, and therefore there was nothing in section 32(4) which failed to give effect to the Directive. The claim was to be stayed.

Judges:

Popplewell J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 695 (QB), [2017] WLR(D) 251

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Data Protection Act 1988 32(4), Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Directive 95/46/EC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information, European, Media

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581697

Tele2 (Netherlands) and Others v Autoriteit Consument en Markt: ECJ 15 Mar 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Electronic communications networks and services – Directive 2002/22/EC – Article 25(2) – Directory enquiry services and directories – Directive 2002/58/EC – Article 12 – Directories of subscribers – Making available personal data concerning subscribers for the purposes of the provision of publicly available directory enquiry services and directories – Subscriber’s consent – Distinction on the basis of the Member State in which publicly available directory enquiry services and directories are provided – Principle of non-discrimination

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2017:214, [2017] EUECJ C-536/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Information

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.580725

Council of The European Union v Access Info Europe: ECJ 17 Oct 2013

ECJ Appeal – Right of access to documents of the institutions – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Article 4(3), first subparagraph – Protection of the institutions’ decision-making process – Note from the Council General Secretariat on the proposals submitted in the course of the legislative process for the revision of Regulation No 1049/2001 – Partial access – Refusal of access to information relating to the identity of Member States which put forward proposals

Citations:

[2013] EUECJ C-280/11, ECLI:EU:C:2013:671

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

Opinion – Council of The European Union v Access Info Europe ECJ 16-May-2013
ECJ Opinion – Appeal – Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – Right of access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents – Council acting in its ‘legislative capacity’ – Note by the General Secretariat of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Information

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.580682