Category: Information

Ministry of Justice (Central Government) FS50615869: ICO 17 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant submitted a request for information to the Ministry of Justice (the ‘MOJ’) about case jurisdictions it oversees under the heading of Special Educational Needs and Disability. By the date of this notice, the MOJ has yet to provide a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOJ breached sections 1 and 10 of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within 20 working days of receipt. The Commissioner requires the MOJ to issue a response to the request set out in paragraph 5 under the FOIA by either complying with section 1(1) or issuing a valid refusal notice.
FOI 1: Upheld FOI 10: Upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50615869
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561784

Ministry of Justice (Central Government) FS50616129: ICO 17 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant submitted a request for information to the Ministry of Justice (the ‘MOJ’) about court costs. By the date of this notice, the MOJ has yet to provide a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOJ breached sections 1 and 10 of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within 20 working days of receipt. The Commissioner requires the MOJ to issue a response to the request set out in paragraph 5 under the FOIA by either complying with section 1(1) or issuing a valid refusal notice.
FOI 1: Upheld FOI 10: Upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50616129
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561785

Transport for London (Education (Other)): ICO 17 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant requested a copy of the train and duty analysist sets of diagrams (TADA) from Transport for London (TfL). The request was refused on the grounds of health and safety (section 38 of FOIA). The Commissioner has found that section 38(1) is engaged and that in all the circumstances the public interest in disclosure is outweighed by the public interest in maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any remedial steps to ensure compliance with the legislation.
FOI 38: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50607218
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561801

Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Central Government ): ICO 14 Mar 2016

The complainant submitted a request to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) for a copy of the file FO 1093/491. The FCO refused to disclose the information relying on section 23(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that the FCO is entitled to rely on this exemption to withhold the requested information.

FOI 23: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50604405
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561764

Ministry of Justice (Central Government) FS50600092: ICO 8 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant submitted a request for information to the Ministry of Justice (the ‘MOJ’) about Just Solutions International and related payments, bids and contract. By the date of this notice, the MOJ has yet to provide a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MOJ breached sections 1 and 10 of the FOIA in that it failed to provide a valid response to the request within 20 working days of receipt. The Commissioner requires the MOJ to issue a response to the request set out in paragraph 5. The MOJ must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
FOI 1: Upheld FOI 10: Upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50600092
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561780

Ministry of Justice (Central Government) FS50601684: ICO 17 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant gave the name and address of an individual and requested information relating to whether that individual was a Magistrate. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) refused to confirm or deny whether it held any information falling within the scope of this request and cited the exemption provided by section 40(5) (personal information) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the MoJ cited section 40(5) correctly so it was not obliged to confirm or deny whether it held this information.
FOI 40: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50601684
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561781

Home Office (Central Government): ICO 16 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant requested information relating to the issuing of an allegedly false passport to a named individual. The Home Office responded to this request by asking the complainant to provide evidence of his identity, evidence that the individual named in the request is deceased, a signed version of his request and his postal address. It stated that the request would not be progressed without the provision of those materials. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was valid for the purposes of section 8 of the FOIA without the provision of any of the materials requested by the Home Office and that it was not permitted to refuse to comply with the request unless those materials were provided. In failing to respond to the request within 20 working days the Home Office breached section 10(1) of the FOIA. It is now required to respond to the request. The Commissioner requires the Home Office respond to the request.
FOI 8: Upheld FOI 10: Upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50611991
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561772

Department of Health (Central Government) FS50596375: ICO 10 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant made a request to the Department of Health (DoH) for information relating to financial figures on the role of technology in driving efficiency savings in the NHS, as discussed at the National Information Board meeting on June 17, 2015. The DoH refused to provide the information it held within the scope of the request under section 35(1)(a) FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DoH has correctly applied section 35(1)(a) FOIA in this case. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
FOI 35: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50596375
Bailii
Freedom of Information Act 2000
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561758

Cabinet Office (Central Government) FS50594131: ICO 8 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant has requested information in files relating to Anthony Blunt. The Cabinet Office withheld this citing the exemptions at section 22(1) (Information intended for future publication), section 23(1) (Security bodies’ information), section 40(2) (Unfair disclosure of personal data); and section 41(1) (Information provided in confidence) as its basis for doing so. It upheld this position at internal review. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office is entitled to rely on section 22(1) as its basis for withholding some of the information and section 23(1) as its basis for withholding the remainder. No steps are required.
FOI 22: Not upheld FOI 23: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50594131
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561741

Birmingham City Council (Local Government (City Council)): ICO 1 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant requested information in relation to wheelie bins. Birmingham City Council (the council) provided some of the information but refused two parts of the request under section 12(1) of the FOIA as it determined that it would take over the appropriate limit to respond. The complainant asked the Commissioner to consider if section 12(1) was engaged to the remaining part of his request, and also whether the council has complied with regulation 16 of the FOIA – providing appropriate advice and assistance. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council is able to rely on section 12(1) of the FOIA to refuse the parts of the request it has and also it has complied with section 16 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
FOI 12: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50592997
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561734

Cabinet Office (Central Government) FS50580558: ICO 7 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant requested information from the Cabinet Office relating to meetings between government ministers or their staff and representatives of the Duchy of Cornwall, including the Duke himself – His Royal Highness Prince Charles. The Cabinet Office refused the request under section 12(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act). The Commissioner’s decision is that Cabinet Office has not sufficiently justified its use of section 12(2) of the Act. The Commissioner requires the public authority to issue a substantive response to the complainant which does not refuse the request under section 12(2) of the Act.
FOI 12: Upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50580558
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561736

Cabinet Office (Central Government) FS50590373: ICO 7 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant has requested information about breaking of diplomatic relations between Syria and the UK during 1986. The Cabinet Office refused to confirm or deny it held information within the scope of the request, citing section 23(5) (security bodies) or section 24(2) (national security) as its basis for doing so. It also cited section 27(4) (international relations). It upheld this at internal review. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office is entitled to rely on section 23(5) and section 24(2) as its basis for refusing to confirm or deny whether the requested information is held. No steps are required.
FOI 23: Not upheld FOI 42: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50590373
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561739

BBC (Other) FS50614296: ICO 8 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant made a request to the BBC for information about the potential conflict of interest involving a BBC employee. The BBC responded to the request by explaining that the information was derogated in that it was held for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and therefore not subject to 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.
FOI 1: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50614296
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561730

BBC (Other): ICO 22 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant has requested information about the cost to the BBC of providing its staff at Media City UK in Salford Quays with free teas and coffee, together with the details of the drinks consumed. The BBC initially refused the request under section 43 – commercial interests, but at the internal stage it refused to provide the majority of the information under section 12 on the basis that complying with the request would exceed the cost limit for dealing with such requests. It did however provide some information on the brands of the beverages. The Commissioner’s decision is that the BBC is entitled to refuse the request under section 12. However, to date, the BBC has not provided the complainant with the advice and assistance required to enable him to make a fresh request which could be dealt with within the appropriate limit. This constitutes a breach of section 16. The Commissioner requires the public authority provide the complainant with appropriate advice and assistance.
FOI 12: Not upheld FOI 16: Upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50598278
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561729

Camden Council (Local Government (District Council)): ICO 8 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant has requested information relating to an insurance claim brought against the council relating to subsidence at a nearby property and remedial work intended to be carried out on a nearby tree. The council refused to disclose a copy of the insurance claim, citing regulations 12(5)(b) and 13 of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that regulation 13 of the EIR applies in this case. He therefore does not require any further action to be taken.
EIR 13: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FER0598086
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561743

Cheshire West and Chester Council (Local Government (County Council)): ICO 16 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant has requested information in relation to building works carried out on a specific address, including the installation of a log burning stove. Cheshire West and Chester Council (the council) provided the information it held but the complainant considered it had not provided all that it held. During the Commissioner’s investigation, a further document was located and sent to the complainant. Other than this further document, the Commissioner has determined that no further information is held by the council within the scope of the request. The Commissioner did however find that the council had breached regulation 5(1) of the EIR in not providing its initial response within the permitted 20 working days following receipt of the request and that it breached regulation 11 of the EIR because it provided the complainant with its internal review outside the required 40 working days following the request for one to be conducted. As the Commissioner has determined that no further information is held and the council has now provided its initial response and internal review response to the complainant, he does not require the council to take any steps.
EIR 5(1): Upheld EIR 5(2): Upheld EIR 11: Upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50594252
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561744

BBC (Other) FS50615017: ICO 8 Mar 2016

ICO The complainant made a request to the BBC for anonymised conflict of interest forms of BBC Newsnight staff. The BBC responded to the request by explaining that the information was derogated in that it was held for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and therefore not subject to 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.
FOI 1: Not upheld

[2016] UKICO FS50615017
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561731

Mr Stuart Glendinning and City Property Glasgow (Evaluation of Bids): SIC 7 Mar 2016

On 13 August 2015, Mr Glendinning asked City Property Glasgow (CPG) for information relating to the proposed sale and development of land adjacent to Park Quadrant Glasgow, including the scores awarded to each of the four finalists and the scoring methodology. CPG disclosed some information to Mr Glendinning and, following review, stated that other information was excepted from disclosure as commercially confidential under regulation 10(5)(e) of the EIRs.
CPG disclosed further information to Mr Glendinning during the Commissioner’s investigation
The Commissioner found that CPG was entitled to rely upon regulation 10(5)(e) to withhold the remaining information.

[2016] ScotIC 056 – 2016
Bailii
Scotland

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561704

Mr Tommy Kane and Scottish Ministers (Meetings Between Scottish Government and Edinburgh Airport): SIC 25 Feb 2016

On 2 September 2015, Mr Kane asked the Scottish Ministers (the Ministers) for a list of all meetings between any Scottish Government Minister or official and any representative of Edinburgh Airport, including details of participants and the reason for meeting, from 10 May 2011 until 1 September 2015. Transport Scotland, on behalf of the Ministers, informed Mr Kane that it would cost in excess of pounds 600 to respond to his request and so, by virtue of section 12 of FOISA, the Ministers were not required to comply with it. After review, Mr Kane remained dissatisfied and applied to the Commissioner for a decision.
The Commissioner investigated and found that the Ministers had properly responded to Mr Kane’s request for information in accordance with Part 1 of FOISA.

[2016] ScotIC 043 – 2016
Bailii
Scotland

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.561697

Department of Finance and Personnel NI (Decision Notice): ICO 15 Mar 2012

ICO The complainant requested information relating to the number of employment tribunal claims brought against Northern Ireland civil service departments from 2000 onwards, defended as well as undefended. The Information Commissioner’s decision is that the Department of Finance and Personnel for Northern Ireland (DFPNI) was incorrect to claim a reliance on section 14 of FOIA. The Information Commissioner therefore requires DFPNI to either disclose the information or issue a valid refusal notice citing a valid exemption in accordance with FOIA.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 14 – Complaint Upheld

[2012] UKICO FS50417990
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.529285

National Archives (Decision Notice): ICO 4 Jul 2007

ICO The National Archives refused to allow the complainant access to a closed Foreign and Commonwealth Office file relating to the supply of tanks for the Saudi Arabian National Guard citing section 27 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act). The Commissioner decided that in refusing this request, The National Archives had dealt with it in accordance with part I of the Freedom of Information Act. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 27 – Complaint Not upheld

[2007] UKICO FS50111530
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.533004

Valuation Office Agency (Decision Notice): ICO 2 Feb 2012

ICO The complainant requested a copy of survey notes relating to a specific building. The Valuation Office Agency (the VOA) stated that the information, if held, would be exempt under section 44(1)(a) of the FOIA and explained that the duty to confirm or deny whether the information is held does not arise under section 44(2). The Commissioner’s decision is that the VOA was correct to refuse to confirm or deny that it holds the requested information under section 44(2) of the FOIA.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 44 – Complaint Not upheld

[2012] UKICO FS50404281
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.529240

Department of Trade and Industry (Decision Notice): ICO 4 Jul 2007

ICO The complainant requested a copy of information about meetings/correspondence between the DTI and the CBI for certain divisions of the DTI. The DTI provided the complainant with some of the information but claimed that the rest of the information was exempt from disclosure under sections 35, 36, 40 and 41 of the Act. Having investigated, the Commissioner does not accept that the public interest in withholding all of the information in respect of section 35 and 36 outweighs the public interest in disclosure and consequently finds that the exemptions were improperly applied to some of the information. Some of the information was, however, correctly withheld under the exemptions at sections 35, 36 and 40. The complaint is therefore partially upheld. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 35 – Complaint Partly Upheld, FOI 36 – Complaint Partly Upheld, FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 41 – Complaint Upheld

[2007] UKICO FS50093052
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.532989

East Hampshire District Council (Decision Notice): ICO 4 Jul 2007

ICO The complainant asked the Council for information concerning the job descriptions of employees who had attended particular training courses. The complainant also requested information concerning the Council’s application of the Hay job evaluation process. The Council withheld part of the requested information under section 40 (personal information). It withheld information concerning the Hay job evaluation process under section 36 (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs). The Commissioner agreed that part of the requested information was exempt under section 40 but decided that the information withheld under section 36 should be released. He also found that the Council had breached section 17 of the Act by its failure to address the public interest test in respect of its application of section 36.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 17 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 36 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld

[2007] UKICO FS50085777
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.532992

Castle Point Borough Council (Decision Notice): ICO 12 Nov 2009

The complainant made a request to inspect the building control information in relation to a named address. The Council agreed to provide the information requested but only on the provision of a fee based on the property search regulations. The Council argued that it was allowed to charge for the information under regulation 8(1) as the information was not in a public register and could not be inspected without further collation by the Council. The Commissioner has investigated and found that the request is a request to inspect environmental information but that the Council cannot charge for the information by virtue of regulation 8(2)(b). The Council must make the information available for inspection in accordance with regulation 5(1) within 35 calendar days of this notice. Information Tribunal appeal number EA/2010/0040 has been dismissed.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 5 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 6 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 8 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld

[2009] UKICO FER0265630
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.532301

Health and Safety Executive (Decision Notice): ICO 23 Nov 2009

The complainant made a series of requests for information relating to the Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE) investigation of a fatal accident at the Charterhouse School in 1998. The public authority initially stated that no information was held and advised the complainant where information which might meet the description in his request may be located. In response to subsequent requests, the HSE disclosed some information but withheld the remainder of the information held under the exemptions provided by sections 40(2) and 41 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act). In particular, the HSE maintains that its findings in the investigation are not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority no longer holds the requested information.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 17 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 41 – Complaint Not upheld

[2009] UKICO FS50208340
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.532327

Bradford Metropolitan District Council (Decision Notice): ICO 16 Oct 2012

The complainant requested the contract between City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (the Council) and a debt collection company. The Council refused to disclose this information under the exemptions provided by sections 41(1) (information provided in confidence) and 43(2) (commercial interests) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council withheld some of the information correctly under section 41(1). However, in relation to the remainder of the information the conclusion of the Commissioner is that this is not exempt. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose to the complainant all of the information falling within the scope of the request, aside from the ‘pricing schedule’ which the Commissioner has concluded was exempt under section 41(1).
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 41 – Complaint Partly Upheld, FOI 43 – Complaint Upheld

[2012] UKICO FS50453224
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.529881

Department for Communities and Local Government (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Nov 2009

Following the conclusion of a public inquiry concerning the proposed Port of Exeter Harbour Revision Order, the complainant asked to be provided with a copy of the Inspector’s report before the Secretary of State for Transport makes his decision about whether or not to approve it. The Planning Inspectorate initially dealt with the request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and refused to provide the requested information relying on section 22 (Information intended for future publication). The Commissioner intervened and advised the public authority that in his view the information constituted environmental information covered by the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (‘the EIR’). Subsequent to the Commissioner’s intervention the Planning Inspectorate claimed that the information was excepted from the right of access by virtue of Regulations 12(4)(d) and (e) (Information still in the course of completion and Internal communications respectively). The Commissioner has determined that some of the information within the report is the complainant’s personal data. Regulation 5(1) does not provide a right of access to that information. The Commissioner has concluded that in respect of the remainder of the requested information the Planning Inspectorate was correct to rely on regulation 12(4)(d) and that the public interest arguments favouring the maintenance of the exception outweigh those in favour of disclosure. As the Commissioner concluded that all of the remaining information was excepted by virtue of Regulation 12(4)(d) he has not gone on to consider the exception in 12(4)(e). The Commissioner has also decided that the Planning Inspectorate breached Regulations 14(2) and 14(3)(a) and (b) in failing to issue a refusal notice citing Regulations 12(4)(d) and (e) together with its public interest considerations, within 20 working days of the complainant’s request. The Commissioner has not ordered any remedial steps.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 5 – Complaint Not upheld, EIR 12.4.d – Complaint Not upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 14 – Complaint Upheld

[2009] UKICO FS50229639
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.532306

Camden and Islington Foundation NHS (Decision Notice): ICO 22 Feb 2011

The complainant contacted the public authority and requested copies of the signed Directors’ Codes of Conduct since November 2007 and related information such as emails, letters and reports. The public authority provided the current post holders’ Codes of Conduct but stated that previous post holders’ Codes of Conduct could not be located. It did not deal with the second part of the request for the related information. The Commissioner is satisfied that the public authority has provided copies of the current Codes of Conduct. He considers that, on the balance of probabilities after nine searches for the information, it is likely that the previous post holders’ Codes of Conduct are not held by the public authority. With regard to the request for the related information, the Commissioner requires the public authority to either disclose or withhold the information by virtue of a valid refusal notice under section 17 to comply with the Act. The public authority also breached its procedural obligations under the Act.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld

[2011] UKICO FS50288655
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.530190