Category: Information

Home Office (Central Government): ICO 20 Oct 2016

The complainant has requested information regarding details of financial support provided to lawyers representing the families of victims of the Hillsborough disaster from the Home Office. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has failed to provide a response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. She requires it to comply with the request or issue a valid refusal notice as set out in section 17 of the FOIA.
FOI 10: Upheld

Citations:

[2016] UKICO FS50648697

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.572879

Home Office (Central Government): ICO 4 Oct 2016

The complainant has requested information about asylum claims based on the grounds of sexual orientation. The Home Office provided some information in respect of the first part of the request, and withheld the information requested at the second part, citing the exemption at section 22 (information intended for future publication). It subsequently withdrew its application of that exemption and said that the information could be disclosed, albeit with redactions to remove personal data. However, it subsequently failed to make any such disclosure. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office failed to respond to the second part of the request in accordance with the FOIA and in so doing breached sections 1(1) and 10(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires the Home Office to issue a fresh response to the complainant in respect of the second part of the request, which is compliant with Part 1 of the FOIA.
FOI 1: Upheld FOI 10: Upheld

Citations:

[2016] UKICO FS50626424

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.572878

General Medical Council (Local Government (Other)) FS50639366: ICO 24 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant requested information about the qualifications of a named doctor. The General Medical Council (GMC) withheld the information, citing the exemption under section 40(2) of the FOIA (third party personal data) as its basis for doing so. The Commissioner’s decision is that the GMC has correctly applied this exemption and does not need to take any further action.
FOI 40: Not upheld

Citations:

[2016] UKICO FS50639366

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.572875

East Devon District Council (Local Government (District Council)) FER0626901: ICO 25 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant has requested a copy of an agreement between East Devon District Council and a developer, Pegasus Life, in relation to a site at Knowle. East Devon District Council refused the request, citing section 43(2) of the FOIA and regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that East Devon District Council has failed to demonstrate that regulation 12(5)(e) is engaged. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the requested information to the complainant. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
EIR 12(5)(e): Upheld

Citations:

[2016] UKICO FER0626901

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.572868

General Medical Council (Local Government (Other)): ICO 24 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant has requested the identity of a Council employee following an allegation of misconduct. Under section 40(5) of the FOIA the General Medical Council (GMC) neither confirms nor denies that it holds this information, which it says would be the personal data of the requester and third persons. The Commissioner’s decision is that the GMC is correct to neither confirm nor deny that it holds the requested information, and that the exemption under section 40(5) is engaged. The Commissioner does not require the GMC to take any steps.
FOI 40: Not upheld

Citations:

[2016] UKICO FS50639075

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.572874

General Medical Council (Local Government (Other)): ICO 4 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant has requested the names of particular individuals involved in considering a complaint submitted to the General Medical Council (GMC). The GMC says that under section 40(5)(b)(i) of the FOIA it is not obliged to confirm or deny that it holds the requested information. It says this is because to do so would disclose personal data of a third person which would breach the first principle of the Data Protection Act (DPA). The Commissioner’s decision is that the GMC is correct to neither confirm nor deny it holds the information that has been requested, for the reason it has given. The Commissioner does not require the GMC to take any steps. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
FOI 40: Not upheld

Citations:

[2016] UKICO FS50627244

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.572873

East Devon District Council (Local Government (District Council)) FER0608237: ICO 25 Oct 2016

The complainant requested documents relating to the councils plan to build new offices for itself. Various documents were requested. The council disclosed some however other documents were withheld under Regulation 12(5)(e). The council argues that these contain the price bid for the land where the current council offices are situated, and estimated costs which the council has drawn together for the development of its new offices. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has correctly applied Regulation 12(5)(e) to the costs assumptions and under the circumstances of the case the public interest rests in maintaining the exception in this case. He has however decided that the council was not correct to apply Regulation 12(5)(e) to the conditional price agreed with the developer, Pegasus, for the land. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: to disclose the relevant documents, excluding sections which provide details of the councils cost assumptions.
EIR 12(5)(e): Partly upheld

Citations:

[2016] UKICO FER0608237

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.572866

East Devon District Council (Local Government (District Council)) FER0623403: ICO 25 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant has requested information regarding the decision to award the contract for the development of the Knowle site in Sidmouth to PegasusLife. In particular he requested information about the bidding process. East Devon District Council (the council) provided the majority of the requested information but withheld under regulation 12(5)(e) information regarding minutes of meetings and correspondence on the subject the decision to award the contract to PegasusLife. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council failed to demonstrate that regulation 12(5)(e) is engaged. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
EIR 12(5)(e): Upheld

Citations:

[2016] UKICO FER0623403

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.572867

BBC (Decision Notice): ICO 19 Aug 2013

The complainant requested how much the BBC paid in rent to Newham council during the 2012 Olympics. 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 FS50504830

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.528537

Department for Communities and Local Government (Central Government): ICO 11 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant has requested local authority data on homelessness for the financial years 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) withheld the information under section 22 as it stated that there was an intention to publish it. The Commissioner’s decision is that DCLG has correctly applied section 22 to the requested information. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
FOI 22: Not upheld

Citations:

[2016] UKICO FS50631570

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.572855

Cotgrave Town Council (Decision Notice): ICO 12 Oct 2011

The complainant requested information about responses to a planning consultation on a proposed development. Some information was disclosed at the time, and additional information was disclosed during the course of the Commissioner’s investigation. The Commissioner finds that the public authority’s searches for the requested information made at the time of the request were inadequate. Further searches have been undertaken, at his request, during the investigation and he concludes that, on the balance of probabilities, no further information was held at the date of the request. He finds breaches of regulation 5 and regulation 11 of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (the EIR).
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 5 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 5 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 11 – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2011] UKICO FS50356920

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.530949

BBC (Decision Notice): ICO 31 Jul 2012

The complainant has requested information as to whether the BBC undertakes surveillance aimed at detecting the unlicensed reception of live television broadcasts which are transmitted via the internet, and received by a person using a computer or similar device. The BBC withheld this information under section 31(a), (b), (d) and (g) and 31(2)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). The Commissioner’s decision is that the BBC has correctly applied section 31(1)(a), (b), (d) and (g) with subsection 31(2)(a) in this case. Information Tribunal appeal number EA/2012/0168 dismissed.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 31 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2012] UKICO FS50431580

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.529600

BBC (Decision Notice): ICO 31 Mar 2011

The complainant requested information concerning BBC staff that travelled from the UK to the US to cover the US mid-term elections. The complainant asked for information about the numbers of staff involved, either travelling from the UK or based in the US, and the travel and living costs incurred. The BBC stated that the requested information fell outside the scope of the Act because it is information held for the purposes of journalism, art or literature. The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is genuinely held for the purposes of journalism. Therefore the BBC is not obliged to comply with Parts I to V of the Act.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2011] UKICO FS50363786

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.530275

BBC (Decision Notice): ICO 18 Nov 2010

The complainant made requests to the BBC for minutes and correspondence involving the BBC Trust in relation to a policy of the BBC being ‘pro or anti climate change’. The BBC stated that it did not hold any information relevant to the request, but that if information were held, it would fall outside the scope of the Act because it would be information held for the purposes of journalism, art or literature. The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information, if it existed, would be genuinely held for the purposes of journalism. Therefore the BBC was not obliged to comply with Parts I to V of the Act in respect of the requests.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2010] UKICO FS50297872

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.531746

Financial Services Authority (Decision Notice): ICO 12 Oct 2011

The complainant has requested information relating to the nationality of employees recruited by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) for the ten years preceding the request. The FSA refused the request on the basis that compliance would be cost-prohibitive and therefore it did not have a duty to retrieve the requested information under section 12(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the FSA correctly claimed a reliance on section 12(1) of FOIA. However, the Commissioner finds that the FSA breached section 16(1) (advice and assistance) by its handling of the request. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any steps as a result of this notice.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 12 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 16 – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2011] UKICO FS50387455

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.530962

Lincolnshire County Council (Decision Notice): ICO 14 Dec 2009

The complainant requested the date and venue of a Vulnerable Adult Multi-Agency Case Conference that took place in March 2008 in relation to a named individual. The Council refused to confirm or deny whether it held information falling within the scope of the request and cited the exemption under section 40(5)(b)(i) of the Act. The Commissioner finds that confirming or denying whether the requested information is held would disclose personal data and would breach the first data protection principle. Therefore the Commissioner is satisfied that the Council correctly applied section 40(5)(b)(i) of the Act and no further steps are required. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2009/0036 withdrawn.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2009] UKICO FS50257450

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.532432

Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council (Decision Notice): ICO 13 Jun 2011

The complainant requested information about Council expenditure for two financial years. The Council refused the request on the basis that the estimated cost of compliance would exceed the appropriate limit as set out at section 12(1) of the Act and the Fees Regulations. The Commissioner’s decision in this case is that the Council acted correctly in refusing the request under section 12(1).
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 12 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2011] UKICO FS50361190

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.530612

Hertfordshire County Council (Decision Notice): ICO 16 Mar 2011

The complainant requested information about extremist groups, racist incidents in schools and ethnicity of teaching staff within the North Hertfordshire council district. The public authority provided some information, stated that other information was not held by it and refused some information on the grounds of the exemptions provided at section 36(2)(c) and 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act. The Commissioner finds that the refused information was correctly refused under section 36(2)(c) of the Act and has therefore not gone on to consider the public authority’s application of section 40(2). He finds that the public authority breached section 1(1)(a) of the Act in failing to state that certain detailed information was not held by it, and section 10 of the Act because some information was provided outside the 20 working day timescale. He requires no action to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 36 – Complaint Not upheld

Citations:

[2011] UKICO FS50297517

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.530337

Southwark Council (Decision Notice): ICO 29 Jun 2011

The complainant requested a copy of a contract signed between the council and Fusion, an organisation contracted to manage the authority leisure facilities, in 2000. The council withheld the information under sections 43(1), 43(2) and section 41. The council disclosed some information but stated that it had withheld other sections of it. The complainant initially accepted the information he received, however a subsequent disclosure made in response to a different request highlighted that significant further information was withheld which had not initially been explained to the complainant. He therefore made a further complaint to the council but was told that he had had the option to complain to the Commissioner at the time but did not do so. The complainant therefore made a belated complaint to the Commissioner. The Commissioner’s Decision is that the council breached section 1(1)(b) by inappropriately relying on sections 41 and 43 and in not providing the information to the complainant. He also considers that the council had not met the requirements of sections 10 and 17.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 17 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 41 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 43 – Complaint Upheld

Citations:

[2011] UKICO FS50373499

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Information

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.530615

Shepherd v The Information Commissioner: CACD 18 Jan 2019

The defendant had been part of an organisation subject to an investigation of child sex abuse. He was cleared of involvement, but had disseminated the confidential reports containing sensitive personal data to support his contention that the process was being misused. He appealed from his conviction under the 1998 Act, saying that the burden of proof on him raising a defence was evidential, and not legal as had been applied by the court.
Held: The appeal was allowed. s.55(2) imposes no more than an evidential burden of proof.

Davis LJ, Jay J, Judge Dean QC
[2019] EWCA Crim 2, [2019] WLR(D) 32
Bailii
Data Protection Act 1998 55
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Lambert HL 5-Jul-2001
Restraint on Interference with Burden of Proof
The defendant had been convicted for possessing drugs found on him in a bag when he was arrested. He denied knowing of them. He was convicted having failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he had not known of the drugs. The case was . .
Cited – Regina v S (Trade Mark Defence) (Roger Sliney v London Borough of Havering) CACD 20-Nov-2002
The defendant alleged that the offence of which had been convicted, under the 1994 Act, infringed his rights under article 6.2 in reversing the burden of proof.
Held: The principle that the duty of proof lay on the prosecution was subject to . .
Cited – Regina v Johnstone HL 22-May-2003
The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act . .
Cited – Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002 HL 14-Oct-2004
Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant?
Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Information, Human Rights

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.633288

City of London Police (Police and Criminal Justice): ICO 14 Jun 2019

The complainant requested information relating to a scoring system he believes is used by Action Fraud to determine whether reports of fraud warrant further investigation. The Commissioner’s decision is that the City of London Police has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within the statutory time frame of 20 working days. The Commissioner requires the City of London Police to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
FOI 10: Complaint upheld

[2019] UKICO fs50840643
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.639138

Charity Commission (Local Government (Other)): ICO 5 Oct 2016

The complainant has requested information about correspondence and meetings concerning particular individuals. The Charity Commission has released some information and told the complainant that it holds no further information within the scope of his request. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Charity Commission holds no further relevant information and has met its obligations under section 1(1) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the Charity Commission to take any steps.
FOI 1: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50625280
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572843

Cabinet Office (Central Government) FS50631621: ICO 17 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant submitted a request to the public authority for documents and correspondence relating to the award of honours to British artists Ronnie Barker, Ronnie Corbett and actress Anna Massey, by Her Majesty The Queen. The public authority withheld the information in scope on the basis of the exemptions at sections 37(1)(b) (the conferring by the Crown of any honour or dignity), 40(2) (personal data) and 41(1) (information provided in confidence) FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to rely on the exemption at section 37(1)(b) to withhold all of the information in scope. No steps are required.
FOI 37: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50631621
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572840

Cabinet Office (Central Government) FS50630649: ICO 17 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant submitted a request to the public authority for documents and correspondence relating to the award of honours to the late British artist David Bowie by Her Majesty The Queen. The public authority disclosed most of the information in scope at the time of the request and withheld a small amount of information on the basis of the exemptions at sections 37(1)(b) (the conferring by the Crown of any honour or dignity), 40(2) (personal data) and 41(1) (information provided in confidence) FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to rely on the exemption at section 37(1)(b) to withhold all of the remaining information that has not been disclosed to the complainant. No steps are required.
FOI 37: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50630649
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572839

Cheshire West and Chester Council (Local Government (County Council)): ICO 20 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant has requested recorded information from Cheshire West and Chester Council. The requested information concerns an application to build houses on land off School Bank, Norley, Cheshire, under planning reference 14/00629/OUT. The Council has refused to disclose some of the recorded information it holds in reliance on Regulations 12(4)(e) – internal communications, 12(5)(b) – prejudice to the course of justice and 12(4)(d) – where the information is in the course of completion. The withheld information is not routinely published by the Council on its planning portal. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has correctly applied Regulations 12(4)(e), 12(5)(b) and 12(4)(d) to the information it has not published on its planning portal. The Council is therefore entitled to withhold that information.
EIR 12(4)(d): Not upheld EIR 12(4)(e): Not upheld EIR 12(5)(b): Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FER0611803
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572844

Cabinet Office (Central Government) FS50625371: ICO 13 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant submitted a request to the public authority for copies of correspondence between the Prime Minister’s office and senior figures in the Church of England regarding changes to the process of making ecclesiastical appointments. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to withhold the information held within the scope of the request on the basis of the exemption at section 35(1)(a) FOIA. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
FOI 35(1)(a): Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50625371
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572837

Cheshire West and Chester Council (Local Government (County Council)): ICO 25 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant has made nine requests for information to Cheshire West and Chester Council (the council) relating to Mill View Primary School as part of a dispute which has been ongoing since July 2014. The council has refused these requests under regulation 12(4)(b) as it considers them to be manifestly unreasonable. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has correctly applied regulation 12(4)(b) to the requests.
EIR 12(4)(b): Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FER0631144
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572845

Birmingham City Council (Local Government (City Council)): ICO 18 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant has requested information on equal opportunities claims against the council over previous years. The council withheld the information and applied the exemption in section 36(2)(c) (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs). The Commissioner’s decision is that council was correct to apply Regulation 36(2)(c) however the public interest in the disclosure of the information outweighs the public interest in the exemption being maintained. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation, to disclose the requested information to the complainant. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
FOI 30: Upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50619003
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572829

Birmingham City Council (Local Government (City Council)) FS50616313: ICO 11 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant has requested images of a third party caught on CCTV. Due to the way the request was made, Birmingham City Council (the council) initially thought he was requesting his own personal data. But following clarification that he was after the images of a third party not his own the council advised it could not legally justify releasing the images to him. The complainant complained to the Commissioner about this request being refused. During the Commissioner’s investigations, the council clarified that this request was being refused under section 40(2) of the FOIA – third party personal data. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council is able to rely on section 40(2) of the FOIA to refuse this request. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
FOI 40: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50616313
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572828

BBC (Other): ICO 6 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant has requested information relating to travel and accommodation expenses of the Director of News and Current Affairs. The BBC responded to some parts of the request but said that parts 2-6 and 8 of the request were covered by the derogation and excluded from FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that parts 2-6 and 8 of the request is held by the BBC for the purposes of ‘journalism, art or literature’ and does 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

[2016] UKICO FS50631598
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572825

BBC (Other): ICO 17 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant requested the cost of tickets and entries to the BAFTA television awards. 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. She therefore upholds the BBC’s position and requires no remedial steps to be taken in this case.
FOI 1: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50641868
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572826

Cabinet Office (Central Government) FS50584503: ICO 13 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant submitted a request to the Cabinet Office for files from the Prime Minister’s Office in relation to the UK Government’s relations with Libya. The Cabinet Office refused the request under section 14(1) of the FOIA on the basis that the request was vexatious. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request is vexatious and the Cabinet Office was entitled to refuse it under section 14(1). No steps are required. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
FOI 14(1): Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50584503
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572835

BBC (Other): ICO 3 Oct 2016

ICO The complainant has requested information about the Government’s decision to cease funding the provision of free television licences to persons over 75 years of age. The Commissioner’s decision is that the BBC has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA because it has not provided a substantive response to this request within 20 working days of receiving it. The Commissioner requires the public authority to provide a response to the complainant’s request of 29 April 2016 in accordance with its obligations under the FOIA.
FOI 10: Upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50646351
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572827

Birmingham City Council (Local Government (City Council)) FS50621082: ICO 11 Oct 2016

ICO A previous decision notice was issued that found Birmingham City Council (the council) would hold times recorded on CCTV footage with regards to part of the complainant’s request. The decision notice ordered the council to provide these times to the complainant, which the council subsequently did. The complainant was not satisfied with the times provided. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council had provided the times. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Tribunal.
FOI 1: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50621082
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572830