ICO The complainant has requested the details of all cases over the last 10 years where the council has exercised its powers of appropriation under section 122 of the Local Government Act 1972 for planning purposes. The council responded to this request citing regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR. It stated that compliance would be manifestly unreasonable on the basis of cost. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request as a whole is manifestly unreasonable based on cost and so regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR is engaged. In terms of the public interest test, the Commissioner has decided that the public interest in favour of disclosure is outweighed by the public interest in maintaining the exception. During the Commissioner’s investigation, the council was asked to carry out various searches. Whilst doing so, three relevant cases came to light. The council decided to disclose the requested information for these cases to the complainant but withheld certain sections of the reports in question under regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR. The Commissioner has reviewed the application of regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR to the redacted sections of the reports the council identified. He has concluded that regulation 12(5)(b) of the EIR does apply and that the public interest in favour of disclosure is outweighed by the public interest in maintaining the exception. The Commissioner therefore does not require any further action to be taken in this case.
EIR 12(4)(b): Upheld EIR 12(5)(b): Not upheld
References: [2015] UKICO FER0574403
Links: Bailii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Last Update: 16 October 2020; Ref: scu.559078 br>