Tag: Information

Goring Parish Council (Decision Notice) FS50521506: ICO 26 Mar 2014

The complainant has requested correspondence between Goring Parish Council and its external auditor since 2006. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has breached section 10 of the FOIA by providing the requested information outside of the time for compliance. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further action in respect of this complaint.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld

[2014] UKICO FS50521506
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.527586

Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (Decision Notice): ICO 23 May 2013

ICO The complainant has requested information from Wirral MBC (council) in relation to disciplinary sanctions against managers resulting in grievances taken out by staff for bullying and harassment at the council. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has breached section 10(1) of the FOIA in regards to this information request. The Commissioner requires the public authority to respond to the information request.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50468862
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528317

Oxfordshire County Council (Decision Notice): ICO 28 May 2013

ICO The complainant has requested a copy of an email sent to selected members in response to allegations at Oxfordshire County Council (council). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has breached section 10 of FOIA in not responding to the request in the 20 working day timeframe. As the council has now responded to the request, the Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50490278
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528298

Lancashire Constabulary (Decision Notice): ICO 28 May 2013

ICO The complainant requested information relating to allegations against him which he had reported to the police as an offence. Lancashire Constabulary stated that the information was exempt under two limbs of section 40, being either the complainant’s ‘personal data’ or the ‘personal data’ of third parties. The Commissioner’s decision is that Lancashire Constabulary was entitled to rely on the exemption at section 40(5) in relation to the entirety of the request. He requires no steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50478796
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528286

City of York Council (Decision Notice): ICO 23 May 2013

ICO The complainant has requested all correspondence between all Council Officials, the Event Organiser and outside bodies in relation to the proposed Galtres Festival at the Rawcliffe Country Park being held in August. The Commissioner’s decision is that the City of York Council (council) has breached section 10 of the FOIA by not responding to the Information Request. The Commissioner requires the public authority to respond to the Information Request from the complainant.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50492529
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528244

Portsmouth City Council: ICO 30 Apr 2013

ICO Decision Notice – The complainant requested risk assessments carried out on the seafront by Portsmouth City Council in the last 2 years. The council initially stated that no such assessments existed, but subsequently a risk assessment was provided to the complainant dated 2010. This was provided to the complainant outside of the 20 day period required by section 10(1) of the Act. The Commissioner’s decision is that Portsmouth City Council has breached section 10(1). The Commissioner does not require the authority to take any steps.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50473820
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528221

Mid Devon District Council: ICO 30 Apr 2013

ICO Decision Notice – The complainant has requested information from Mid Devon District Council (‘the council’) relating to an investigation into money paid to Cullompton Town Council by Devon Gateway Trust Ltd. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has correctly applied the exemption for personal data at section 40(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner has also decided that the council breached section 10(1) of the FOIA by failing to respond within the statutory time limit of 20 working days but does not require any steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50469997
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528212

Manchester City Council (Decision Notice) FS50469749: ICO 23 Apr 2013

ICO The complainant has requested correspondence relating to his complaint against an employee of a healthcare provider contracted by Manchester City Council (‘the council’). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has correctly applied the exemption for personal data at section 40(2) of the FOIA and is therefore entitled to withhold the information. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50469749
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528209

Hartlepool Borough Council (Decision Notice): ICO 30 Apr 2013

ICO The complainant requested a large amount of information from Hartlepool Borough Council (‘the council’) in the form of multiple requests relating to equal pay claims and job evaluations. The council provided a significant amount of information. However, in relation to seven of the requests, the council relied on the exclusion under section 12(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (‘the FOIA’). This exclusion relates to requests where the costs of compliance would exceed the ‘appropriate limit’. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council correctly relied on section 12(1) to refuse the requests. However, he found that the council failed to offer appropriate advice and assistance, breaching its obligation under section 16(1) of the FOIA. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 12 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 16 – Complaint Upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50458653
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528193

East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust: ICO 30 Apr 2013

ICO Decision Notice – The complainant has requested information relating to the proposed changes outlined in the ‘Being the Best’ consultation document. East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust (EMAS) provided some information to the complainant but said that further information was not held under section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). It said that it would exceed the cost limit under section 12 FOIA to comply with one part of the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that EMAS correctly stated that no further information was held relevant to the scope of the request other than the information requested at part 7 of the request. However the Commissioner does consider that it would exceed the cost limit under section 12 FOIA to comply with part 7 of the request. As the Commissioner considers that section 12 FOIA was correctly applied to part 7 of the request, the rest of the request could have been aggregated and therefore section 12 FOIA would apply to all of the request. The Commissioner does not consider that EMAS provided the complainant with sufficient advice and assistance in relation to part 7 of the request under section 16 FOIA.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 12 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 16 – Complaint Upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50478875
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528184

The Burnett Practice (Undertakings): ICO 26 Apr 2013

ICO An undertaking to comply with the seventh data protection principle has been signed by The Burnett Practice. This follows an investigation whereby an email account used by the practice had been subject to a third party attack. The email account subject to the attack was used to provide test results to patients and included a list of names and email addresses.

[2013] UKICO 2013-32
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528171

Thames Valley Police (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant requested information about police attendance at incidents relating to a local care home. Thames Valley Police refused to confirm or deny whether information was held, citing section 30(3) of FOIA. The Commissioner found that the exemption was engaged and that the public interest in maintaining the exclusion of the duty to confirm or deny outweighed the public interest in disclosing whether Thames Valley Police holds the information. The Commissioner therefore found that Thames Valley Police had acted correctly in refusing to confirm or deny whether it held the information.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 30 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50478108
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528147

North Somerset Council (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant requested information from North Somerset Council (‘the council’) relating to the proposal to build a new crematorium. The council supplied some information but withheld other information using exceptions under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (‘the EIR’). The complainant asked the Commissioner to consider whether this information had been correctly withheld and also whether the council had identified all the information requested with reference to particular areas of concern. During the Commissioner’s investigation, further information was disclosed to the complainant and the only exception that remained relevant was regulation 13(1). The Commissioner’s decision is that the council did hold some additional information and he has therefore found a breach of regulation 5(1) and 5(2) for the failure to disclose this information within 20 working days or by the date of the internal review. The Commissioner considered that the council had correctly withheld some information using regulation 13(1). The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
Section of Act/E and Finding: EIR 5 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 5 – Complaint Upheld, EIR 13 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FER0466032
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528134

Ministry of Defence (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant has requested information about his late father’s time in the Royal Navy, including medical notes. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Ministry of Defence has applied section 41 appropriately to the withheld medical information. The Commissioner does not require the Ministry of Defence to carry out any steps.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 41 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50476248
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528121

Walberswick Parish Council (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant requested information from Walberswick Parish Council (‘the council’) relating to the Community Benefit Fund. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council correctly applied section 14(1) of the FOIA because the complainant was acting in concert with other individuals and the request was vexatious. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 14 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50459125
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528157

Supreme Court (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant requested documents and information in a specified Crown Prosecution Service case relating to: the petition for leave to appeal to the United Kingdom Supreme Court (UKSC), the permission to appeal, and a connected court order. The Commissioner’s decision is that the section 32(1) FOIA exemption is engaged. As section 32 FOIA is an absolute exemption, the Commissioner did not proceed to consider the public interest, and concluded that UKSC had acted correctly in withholding the information. The Commissioner does not require UKSC to take any action.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 32 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50476500
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528145

Haringey London Borough Council (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant has requested information about a contract the public authority has for the supply of staff. The public authority has provided some information but has withheld the remainder citing section 43(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was only entitled to withhold a small amount of the information under section 43(2). Having found the contract to include some ‘personal data’; he also considered this but found that section 40(2) was not engaged. He also found procedural breaches. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the information requested except for some pricing details in Schedules Two, Three, Four, Fifteen and Seventeen, and some personal data in Schedule One.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 40 – Complaint Partly Upheld, FOI 43 – Complaint Partly Upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50462682
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528091

Financial Services Authority (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant has requested information about Financial Services Authority (FSA) enquiries into an overseas property investment scheme run by [named company]. The FSA refused to provide the requested information under section 40(2), section 42, section 43(2) and section 44(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). The Commissioner’s decision is that the FSA has correctly applied section 40(2), section 43(2) and section 44(1)(a) FOIA to withhold some of the requested information. As section 42 FOIA was applied to the same information as section 44(1)(a) FOIA, the Commissioner did not consider the application of section 42 FOIA any further. However there is some information to which no exemptions have been applied. The Commissioner requires the public authority to comply with section 1 FOIA in relation to the information to which no exemptions have been applied. These are the parts of the withheld information which were provided to the Commissioner, which were not marked with exemptions.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Partly Upheld, FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 43 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 44 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50467752
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528081

Department of Health (Decision Notice): ICO 12 Mar 2013

ICO The complainant has requested information held by the Department of Health (the Doh) relating to an Independent Inquiry conducted by University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust (the trust). The DoH applied section 12 of the FOIA and said that it would exceed the appropriate cost limit to comply with the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DoH has correctly applied section 12 of the FOIA in this case. The Commissioner requires no further steps to be taken.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 12 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50474249
Bailii
Freedom of Information Act 2000
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528066

Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant has requested information concerning the environment of the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) originally mistakenly responded to the request under the FOIA by the use of Section 12 (cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit). The FCO rectified this error at internal review and substituted Regulation 12(4)(c) (request formulated in too general a manner) under the EIR 2004 as the basis for refusing the request. The complainant subsequently submitted a refined request which was treated as a new request by the FCO and which was refused on the basis of Regulation 12(4)(b) (manifestly unreasonable). The Commissioner’s decision is that the FCO application of Regulation 12(4)(c) to the initial request was invalid. The Commissioner also finds that Regulation 12(4)(b) was not engaged with regard to the complainant’s subsequent refined request. The Commissioner requires the public authority issue a fresh response to the complainant’s refined request of 5 January 2012, that does not rely upon the exception at regulation 12(4)(b).
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 12.4.b – Complaint Upheld, EIR 12.4.c – Complaint Upheld

[2013] UKICO FER0441185
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528084

Home Office (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant requested details of funding provided by the Home Office to ACPO (the Association of Chief Police Officers). After protracted correspondence, the Home Office provided some information and withheld the remainder under sections 24(1), 31(1)(a), 38(1)(b), 40(2) and 43(2) of the FOIA. The Commissioner finds that the Home Office was entitled to withhold some of the requested information but that some of the information ought to have been disclosed to the complainant at the time of his request. The Commissioner requires the Home Office to disclose the information specified in the attached confidential schedule.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 24 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 31 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 38 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 40 – Complaint Partly Upheld, FOI 43 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50429761
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528097

House of Commons (Decision Notice): ICO 18 Mar 2013

ICO The complainant has requested correspondence between the House of Commons and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) over the past three years relating to the tax treatment of the House’s residential accommodation. The Commissioner’s decision is that, by virtue of a section 36(7) certificate, the House of Commons has correctly applied section 36(2) FOIA in withholding the information requested. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any further action.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 36 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50479750
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528101

Department of Health (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

ICO The complainant made a request for ministerial diaries. The Department of Health (DoH) provided the complainant with some of the requested information, but made significant redactions under sections 21, 23, 24, 27, 35(1)(a) and (d), 36, 38, 40(2), 41 and 44. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DoH has correctly applied section 23 and section 40(2) where relied upon to make the relevant redactions. However the Commissioner considers that the DoH incorrectly applied the other exemptions. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose or issue a valid refusal notice in respect of the information which the DoH has marked as out of scope of the request. Disclose the withheld information apart from that redacted under section 40(2) and section 23 FOIA. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 21 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 23 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 24 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 27 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 35 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 36 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 38 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 41 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 44 – Complaint Upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50406024
Bailii
Freedom of Information Act 2000
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528065

Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant has requested correspondence about emissions performance standards between the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) and various third parties, including two government departments, a non-departmental government agency and a number of energy companies. DECC disclosed some information but withheld the remainder under regulations covering internal communications (regulation 12(4)(e)), unfinished documents (regulation 12(4)(d)) and unfair disclosure of personal data (regulation 13). It upheld its position at internal review. The Commissioner’s decision is that DECC conducted adequate searches for the information described in the requests and is entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(e) and regulation 13. No steps are required.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: EIR 12.4.e – Complaint Not upheld, EIR 13 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FER0468055
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528063

Devon County Council (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant requested information about surveys on road markings and signs in Sidmouth and details of the faults identified. Devon County Council responded but the complainant felt its response was incomplete and possibly incorrect. The Council provided further clarification during the Commissioner’s investigation. The Information Commissioner (the Commissioner) has decided that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council has not provided all the information it holds in relation to the request in breach of sections 1(1)(a) and 1(1)(b) of FOIA. The Council also breached section 10(1) of FOIA because it did not provide its initial response within 20 working days. The Information Commissioner requires the public authority to, in relation to the 43 works orders it holds for the period 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2009, either disclose these to the complainant or issue a valid refusal notice in accordance with section 17(1) of FOIA. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50459536
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528070

Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant made a number of requests, on two separate dates, to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) relating to an existing dispute with the department. Defra has refused these requests under section 14(1) (vexatious request) of FOIA. The Commissioner considers that Defra was correct to rely on section 14(1) and does not therefore require Defra to take any steps as a result of this notice.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 14 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50465825
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528056

Department for Business Innovation and Skills (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant has requested information connected to a Select Committee report on Pub Companies. The public authority has provided some information but withheld the remainder citing the exemptions at sections 29, 35(1), 40(2), 41, 42 and 43(2) of the FOIA; the complainant did not contest the citing of section 40(2). The Commissioner’s decision is that, except for document 175, sections 35, 42 and 43(3) are all engaged and the public interest in maintaining these exemptions is upheld. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take disclose the document numbered 175.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 29 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 35 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 42 – Complaint Not upheld, FOI 43 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50464968
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528048

Department for Communities and Local Government (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Mar 2013

The complainant has requested information relating to a complaint made in 2012 by Jack Dromey MP to Andrew Dilnot, Chair of the UK Statistics Authority. The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) refused the request under the exemption for information accessible via other means, the exemption for ministerial communications, the exemption for information regarding the formulation and development of government policy and a number of subsections of the exemption for prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs. During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation DCLG withdrew its reliance all the exemptions except for that relating to the formulation and development of government policy. It also confirmed that some of the information was being withheld under the exemption for personal information. The Commissioner’s decision is that DCLG has not demonstrated that the exemption for information relating to the formulation and development of government policy is engaged. In relation to the personal data of junior officers contained within the requested information, the Commissioner finds that DCLG has correctly applied section 40(2) to withhold the information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose all the requested information, except for the personal data of junior officers.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 35 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 40 – Complaint Not upheld

[2013] UKICO FS50466182
Bailii
England and Wales

Information

Updated: 06 December 2021; Ref: scu.528049