Decision notices
Showing 1 to 25 of 21,758
Department for Education
24 May 2024, Central government
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department for Education (DfE) is entitled to rely on the FOIA exemptions under sections 36(2)(b)(i), 36(2)(b)(ii) and 36(2)(c) of FOIA to withhold information about a business case for a training programme. Section 36 concerns prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs. It’s not necessary for DfE to take any corrective steps.
FOI 36(2)(b)(i): Complaint not upheld FOI 36(2)(c): Complaint not upheld FOI 36(2)(b)(ii): Complaint not upheld
Oxford Direct Services Ltd
24 May 2024, Other
The complainant submitted a three part request for information held by Oxford Direct Services Limited (ODSL) relating to low access shower adaptions completed over a 36 month time period. ODSL provided the complainant with some information, and advised that it considered the remaining information relevant to the request to be exempt from disclosure under section 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, ODSL has not identified all of the information held that is relevant to all three parts of the complainant’s request, and has therefore failed to comply with section 1 of FOIA. Furthermore, the Commissioner has found that section 43(2) is not engaged in respect of the withheld information which ODSL has currently identified as being relevant to part 2 and part 3 of the request. When relying on section 43(2) of FOIA, ODSL also failed to set out its consideration of the public interest test, both in its refusal notice to the complainant, and at the internal review stage. Therefore, the Commissioner has found a breach of section 17(3) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires ODSL to carry out adequate searches to identify all of the information held that is relevant to the request, and issue a fresh response to all three parts of the request after consideration of that information. With regard to the withheld information that has already been identified as relevant to part 2 and part 3 of the request, ODSL should now provide the total cost of each level access shower adaption, and the names of all contractors or subcontractors that carried out work on each adaption.
FOI 43(2): Complaint upheld FOI 17(3): Complaint upheld FOI 1: Complaint upheld
Department for Culture, Media and Sport
24 May 2024, Central government
The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified under FOIA. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
FOI 10(1): Complaint upheld
Department of Health and Social Care
24 May 2024, Central government
The complainant has requested a list of responders to a consultation on planned advertising restriction for foods high in fat, salt and sugar along with the submissions from these responders. The DHSC provided the list of responders and the request was refined to the first five pages of submissions which the DHSC provided in redacted form with information exempt under section 35(1)(a) and 43(2) FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the DHSC has failed to demonstrate that the section 43(2) exemption is engaged. Section 35(1)(a) is engaged but the public interest favours disclosure. The Commissioner requires DHSC to provide the complainant with a copy of the information it withheld from the submissions under section 35(1)(a) and 43(2).
FOI 35: Complaint upheld FOI 43: Complaint upheld
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
24 May 2024, Central government
The complainant has requested information relating to meetings between a Minister and CEO’s of various water companies. Defra provided some information on the administration of the meetings but withheld any information relating to the discussions that actually took place and any briefings given to the Minister beforehand under regulation 12(4)(e) as the information amounted to internal communications. The Commissioner’s decision is that the information has been correctly categorised as internal communications under regulation 12(4)(e). He finds that the public interest favours disclosure of some of the withheld information but that Defra has correctly withheld the background to the key questions in the briefing documents and the information in the read-outs of the meetings. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the information in the factsheet and the objectives, top lines and key questions (minus the backgrounds) in the briefing documents.
EIR 12(4)(e): Complaint partly upheld
Coulsdon Sixth Form College
24 May 2024, Education
The complainant requested information from Croydon College (the public authority). By the date of this notice the public authority had not issued a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has breached section 10(1) of 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 public authority to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The public authority must take this step within 30 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 FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
FOI 10: Complaint upheld
Sunderland City Council
24 May 2024, Local government
The complainant requested from Sunderland County Council which is now part of a new combined authority - North East Combined Authority (the Council), information relating to Unpaid Toll Charge Notice (UTCN). The Council stated that to comply with the request would exceed the cost limit, and therefore applied section 12(1) (cost of compliance) of FOIA to the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse to comply with the request. He also finds that the Council complied with its obligations under section 16(1) of FOIA to offer advice and assistance. Therefore, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision.
FOI 12(1): Complaint not upheld FOI 16(1): Complaint not upheld
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
24 May 2024, Central government
The complainant submitted a request to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) seeking copies of internal paperwork regarding the investigation into the behaviour of the then Minister of State Christopher Pincher MP. The FCDO confirmed that it held information but withheld this on the basis of sections 36(2)(c) (effective conduct of public affairs), 40(2) (personal data) and 41(1) (information provided in confidence) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the information withheld by virtue of section 40(2) is exempt from disclosure on the basis of this exemption. However, the Commissioner has concluded that the information withheld from disclosure on the basis of section 36(2)(c) is not exempt from disclosure on the basis of this exemption. The Commissioner has also concluded that the FCDO breached section 17(1) given its delays in responding to this request.
FOI 17: Complaint upheld FOI 40: Complaint not upheld FOI 36: Complaint upheld
Department for Education
23 May 2024, Central government
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Department for Education (DfE) is entitled to rely on the FOIA exemptions under sections 36(2)(b)(i), 36(2)(b)(ii) and 36(2)(c) of FOIA to withhold some of the requested information about a review of a school. Section 36 concerns prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs. It’s not necessary for DfE to take any corrective steps.
FOI 36(2)(b)(i): Complaint not upheld FOI 36(2)(c): Complaint not upheld FOI 36(2)(b)(ii): Complaint not upheld
Department of Finance Northern Ireland
23 May 2024, Other
The complainant has requested information relating to the expansion of places at Magee University. The Department of Finance (DoF) refused to provide the information citing section 35(1) FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 35(1) is engaged but the public interest lies in disclosing part of the withheld information. The Commissioner requires DoF to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the information listed in the confidential annex ensuring personal data is redacted where necessary. Details of the information to be disclosed is contained in a confidential annex made available to DoF only. The public authority must take these steps within 30 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 35: Complaint partly upheld
Birmingham City Council
23 May 2024, Local government
The complainant requested information about artwork owned by Birmingham City Council (the “Council”). The Council disclosed some information and withheld other information under the exemptions for law enforcement (section 31), health and safety (section 38) and commercial interests (section 43). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly withheld the information in part 6 of the request under section 31. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
FOI 31: Complaint not upheld
Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council
23 May 2024, Local government
The complainant requested information about the reduction in disabled parking bays in a particular location. Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council (the Council) provided some information and stated other information was not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities the Council does not hold any additional information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
FOI 10(1): Complaint upheld
Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
23 May 2024, Health
The complainant has requested information relating to the Epic electronic patient record system. Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (“the public authority”) refused to comply with the request, citing section 12 (cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that: the public authority was correct to refuse the request under section 12 and the public authority has complied with its section 16 (advice and assistance) obligations. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
FOI 12(1): Complaint not upheld FOI 16: Complaint not upheld
Great Wakering Parish Council
23 May 2024, Local government
The complainant requested information about allotments and the decision to ban bonfires at allotments. Great Wakering Parish Council (the Council) disclosed some information and stated other information was not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities the Council does not hold some of the information requested and therefore regulation 12(4)(a) of the EIR applies. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
EIR 12(4)(a): Complaint not upheld
Monmouthshire County Council
23 May 2024, Local government
The complainant requested from Monmouthshire County Council (the Council) information relating to Old Monmouth Road. The Council refused the request and cited regulation 12(4)(b) (manifestly unreasonable) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR to refuse to comply with the request, and the public interest lies in maintaining the exception. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any further steps as a result of this decision.
EIR 12(4)(b): Complaint not upheld
Police HQ Wiltshire Police
23 May 2024, Police and criminal justice
The complainant has requested information relating to fly-grazing and loose/escaped horses/ponies in a particular area. The above public authority (“the public authority”) relied on section 12 of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner also finds that the public authority complied with its section 16 obligation to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
FOI 12(1): Complaint not upheld FOI 16: Complaint not upheld
Secretary of State for the Home Department (Home Office)
23 May 2024, Central government
The complainant has requested to know the amount that was paid to a hotel which was due to house asylum seekers, prior to those plans being dropped. The Home Office refused the request, citing section 43 (Commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office was entitled to cite section 43(2) to refuse the request.
FOI 43: Complaint not upheld
Ministry of Justice
23 May 2024, Central government
The complainant requested information relating to checks on external speakers. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) refused to provide the requested information, citing section 35(1) (formulation and development of government policy) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 35 is not engaged. The Commissioner requires the MoJ to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the withheld information to the complainant.
FOI 35: Complaint not upheld
Steyning Parish Council
22 May 2024, Local government
The complainant requested information relating to Steyning Parish Council (“SPC”). SPC relied on section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious) to refuse to comply with the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the SPC is not entitled to rely on section 14(1) of FOIA to refuse to comply with the request. He has also determined that SPC is in breach of section 17(5) of FOIA, by failing to issue a refusal notice within 20 working days of the request. The Commissioner requires SPC to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. • Issue a fresh response to the request that does not rely on section 14(1) of FOIA. SPC must take this step within 30 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 14(1): Complaint not upheld
West of England Combined Authority
22 May 2024, Local government
The complainant requested from The West of England Combined Authority (‘WECA’), work diaries relating to the Interim Chief Executive of WECA, and other information associated with his employment in various roles within WECA. WECA refused the request on the basis that section 36(2)(c) (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs), section 43(2) (commercial interests) 38(1)(b) (health and safety), and section 40(2) (personal data) applied. The Commissioner’s decision is that WECA was not correct to withhold the information under section 36(2)(c) and section 43(2), however it was correct to withhold some information under section 40(2). He has not found it necessary to consider the application of section 38(1)(b). The Commissioner requires WECA to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. To disclose the withheld information, subject to appropriate redactions of personal data under section 40(2) of FOIA as outlined within this decision notice.
FOI 43(2): Complaint upheld FOI 40(2): Complaint partly upheld FOI 36(2)(c): Complaint upheld
Mid Devon District Council
22 May 2024, Local government
The complainant requested information about a draft business plan relating to the creation of a property development company by Mid Devon District Council (the Council). The Council provided a copy of the main body of the report but withheld the appendix, citing section 43(2) (prejudice to commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 43(2) is not engaged regarding the withheld information. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation - disclose the withheld information.
FOI 43(2): Complaint upheld
Chief Constable of Essex Police
22 May 2024, Police and criminal justice
The complainant requested information about the number of officers on duty on a particular Bank Holiday night shift. Essex Police refused to comply with the request, citing section 12(1) (cost of compliance) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that Essex Police is entitled to rely on section 12(1) to refuse to comply with the request. He also finds that Essex Police complied with its obligations under section 16 of FOIA to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
FOI 12: Complaint not upheld FOI 16: Complaint not upheld
North Northamptonshire Council
22 May 2024, Local government
The complainant requested pre-application advice relating to a specific planning application. North Northamptonshire Council (the “Council”) refused the request citing the exceptions for confidentiality of proceedings (regulation 12(5)(d)) and interests of the information provider (regulation 12(5)(f)). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly withheld the requested information under regulation 12(5)(d). The Commissioner does not require further steps.
EIR 12(5)(d): Complaint not upheld
Mid Sussex District Council
22 May 2024, Local government
The complainant requested information about Burgess Hill Train Station developments. Mid Sussex District Council (the “Council”) disclosed some information and confirmed that further information was not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly confirmed that the information requested, beyond that disclosed to the complainant, was not held and that regulation 12(4)(a) applies but that it failed to issue a proper refusal notice and breached regulation 14(3). The Commissioner does not require further steps.
EIR 12(4)(a): Complaint not upheld EIR 14(3): Complaint upheld
Chief Constable of Warwickshire Police
22 May 2024, Police and criminal justice
The complainant requested information from Warwickshire Police about complaints from members of the public about the Warwickshire Hunt. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has breached section 10(1) of 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 public authority to take the following step to ensure compliance with the legislation. The public authority must provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. The public authority must take this step within 30 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 FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.
FOI 10(1): Complaint upheld