Decision notices

10 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. This notice was issued in error for a duplicate complaint.

FOI 10: Complaint upheld

10 May 2024, Local government

The complainant submitted a request to the London Borough of Islington (the Council) seeking copies of correspondence it had exchanged with a party alleged to have committed a particular breach of planning legislation. The Council withheld the requested information on the basis of regulation 12(5)(b) (course of justice and inquiries). The Commissioner’s decision is that the information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of this exception and that in all the circumstances of the case the public interest favours maintaining this exception.

EIR 12(5)(b): Complaint not upheld

10 May 2024, Other

The complainant requested from Channel Four Television Corporation (“Channel 4”) information relating to a potential conflict of interests. Channel 4 explained the information was covered by the derogation and excluded from FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that this information was held by Channel 4 for the purposes of ‘journalism, art or literature’ and does not fall inside FOIA. The Commissioner therefore upholds Channel 4’s position and he does not require it to take any further steps as a result of this decision.

FOI 3: Complaint not upheld

10 May 2024, Central government

The complainant has requested from the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (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 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 FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court. The Commissioner expects the public authority to take appropriate precautions to protect any personal data when disclosing information in a spreadsheet or similar format; https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/eir-and-access-to-information/information-commissioner-s-office-advisory-note-to-public-authorities/

FOI 10(1): Complaint upheld

10 May 2024, Central government

The complainant has requested from the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (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 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 FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court. The Commissioner expects the public authority to take appropriate precautions to protect any personal data when disclosing information in a spreadsheet or similar format; https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/eir-and-access-to-information/information-commissioner-s-office-advisory-note-to-public-authorities/

FOI 10(1): Complaint upheld

10 May 2024, Private companies

The complainant has requested information about discharges from United Utilities. United Utilities (“the public authority”) refused to provide the requested information, citing regulation 12(5)(b) (The course of justice and inquiries exception) and regulation 12(5)(d) (confidentiality of proceedings). The Commissioner’s decision is that the withheld information doesn’t engage regulation 12(5)(b) or regulation 12(5)(d). Therefore the public authority isn’t entitled to withhold it. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the requested information.

EIR 12(5)(d): Complaint not upheld EIR 12(5)(b): Complaint not upheld

9 May 2024, Education

The complainant submitted a request to Sport England for information relating to any conditions imposed or suggestions made to Swim England. The Commissioner’s decision is that section 36(2)(b)(ii) is engaged and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. The Commissioner does not require further steps as a result of this decision notice.

FOI 36(2)(b)(ii): Complaint not upheld

9 May 2024, Police and criminal justice

The complainant has requested a copy of a Data Protection Impact Assessment (‘DPIA’) covering the use of artificial intelligence (‘AI’) technology to detect traffic offences. Devon and Cornwall Police (‘DCP’) said that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, DCP does not hold the requested DPIA. However, by failing to respond to the request within the statutory time for compliance, DCP breached sections 1(1) and 10(1) of FOIA.

FOI 10: Complaint upheld FOI 1: Complaint not upheld

9 May 2024, Health

The complainant requested information from United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust (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

9 May 2024, Police and criminal justice

The complainant made a request for information relating to cases referred to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), outsourcing operational activities and the employees at Greater Manchester Police (GMP). GMP refused to provide the requested information saying that to do so would exceed the appropriate limit at section 12(1) (cost of compliance) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that, in respect of requests one, two and three GMP was entitled to aggregate these requests and rely on section 12(1). The Commissioner does not agree that requests four to eight can be aggregated with the rest. The Commissioner also finds that GMP did not comply with its section 16(1) obligation to offer advice and assistance.

FOI 12(1): Complaint not upheld FOI 16(1): Complaint upheld

9 May 2024, Local government

The complainant has requested from Westminster City Council (‘the Council’) the year-on-year income it received from leasing a particular site for advertising. The Council disclosed some information, but it refused to disclose the income it received for the most recent two financial years, citing section 43(2) (Commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to apply section 43(2) to withhold that information.

FOI 43: Complaint not upheld

9 May 2024, Other

The complainant has requested the ICO to disclose information relating to a tribunal case involving the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) where it transpired that there was an issue with its section 36 of FOIA qualified person’s (QP) authorisation. The ICO disclosed the recorded information it holds. The complainant disputed that the ICO had disclosed all the recorded information it holds and claimed that it has also breached section 16 of FOIA by failing to provide them with advice and assistance. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities the ICO has identified and disclosed all the recorded information it holds falling within the scope of the request. He has concluded that there is no breach of section 16 of FOIA. As a result the Commissioner does not require any further steps to be taken.

FOI 1: Complaint not upheld FOI 16: Complaint not upheld

9 May 2024, Police and criminal justice

The complainant requested information relating to a private dining club at the University of Oxford. Thames Valley Police relied on section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was vexatious and therefore Thames Valley Police were entitled to rely upon section 14(1) of FOIA to refuse it. The Commissioner does not require any steps.

FOI 14(1): Complaint not upheld

8 May 2024, Police and criminal justice

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: Complaint upheld

8 May 2024, Health

The complainant has requested information about parking charge notices issued by a contractor at one of the car parks on the hospital site. University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust (‘the Trust’) advised that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the requested information is not held by the Trust as per section 3(2) of FOIA – Information held on behalf of. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.

FOI 3: Complaint not upheld

8 May 2024, Local government

The complainant requested information regarding bins belonging to a named property causing an obstruction on the public highway, including CCTV footage. Dorset Council (‘the Council’) provided some information, however the complainant considers that the Council holds additional information which it has failed to disclose. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has not complied with its obligations under regulation 5(1) of the EIR. The Council’s failure to conduct an internal review also represents a breach of regulation 11(4), whilst its failure to disclose some information until during the Commissioner’s investigation is a breach of regulation 5(2) of the EIR. However, the Council was entitled to redact a small amount of personal data under regulation 13 (personal information) from a table disclosed during the Commissioner’s investigation.

EIR 11(4): Complaint upheld EIR 5(1): Complaint upheld EIR 13: Complaint not upheld EIR 5(2): Complaint upheld

7 May 2024, Central government

The complainant has requested from the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) information about meetings, correspondence and information shared between the AGO and representatives of the Israeli Embassy. The AGO refused to disclose the information it held, citing section 27(1)(a) (International relations) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the AGO was entitled to apply section 27(1)(a) to withhold the requested information. He also finds that, on the balance of probabilities, it does not hold further information falling within the scope of the request.

FOI 1: Complaint not upheld FOI 27: Complaint not upheld

7 May 2024, Other

The complainant has requested information relating to Channel Four Television Corporation’s (Channel 4) financial commitment to the Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority (CIISA). Channel 4 refused to provide the information on the basis of section 43(2) of FOIA (Commercial Interest). The Commissioner’s decision is that Channel 4 was correct to apply section 43(2) to withhold the information. He does not require the public authority to take any further steps.

FOI 43(2): Complaint not upheld

7 May 2024, Central government

The complainant requested information relating to specific material that was gathered during a review commissioned by the then Attorney General. The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) refused to provide the requested information, citing section 31(1)(c) (law enforcement) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the AGO is entitled to rely on section 31(1)(c) of FOIA to refused to disclose the withheld information. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.

FOI 31: Complaint not upheld

7 May 2024, Local government

The complainant requested information about an individual’s registration as a foster carer. City of Wolverhampton Council (the “Council”) refused to confirm or deny whether the information was held, relying on the exemption for personal information in section 40(5B) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council’s refusal notice did not comply with section 17(1) but that is entitled to rely on section 40(5) to refuse to confirm or deny that it holds the requested information. The Commissioner does not require further steps.

FOI 17: Complaint upheld FOI 40(5): Complaint not upheld

7 May 2024, Local government

The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified in the EIR. The Commissioner requires it to provide the complainant with a response to this request within 30 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under the EIR.

EIR 5(2): Complaint upheld

7 May 2024, Local government

The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Hackney (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 failed to respond to the request within 20 working days and has therefore breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR. The Commissioner requires the public authority to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligation under the EIR. 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 Freedom of Information Act and may be dealt with as contempt of court.

EIR 5(2): Complaint upheld

7 May 2024, Central government

The complainant requested complaint related information about judges from the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (the ‘JCIO’), which falls under the remit of the Ministry of Justice (the ‘MOJ’). The JCIO argued that it is an independent statutory body and is not a public authority for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (‘FOIA’) and is therefore not obliged to respond to FOIA requests. The Commissioner’s decision is that the JCIO is not a statutory body. He finds that the JCIO is part of the MOJ which is a public authority for the purposes of FOIA for the reasons set out in this notice. By failing to confirm whether it held the requested information within 20 working days, the MOJ has breached sections 1(1)(a) and 10(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the MOJ to issue a fresh response to the complainant’s request under FOIA 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 10: Complaint upheld FOI 1: Complaint upheld

3 May 2024, Other

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 35 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.

FOI 10(1): Complaint upheld

3 May 2024, Central government

The complainant has requested information relating to the Department of Health and Social Care’s (DHSC) discharge of its responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010 pertaining to the determination of central government funding available to social services authorities, as well as information relating to the process of analysis and the process of assessment of the overall sufficiency of adult social care funding. The Commissioner’s decision is that DHSC was correct to rely on section 41(1) and 21 of FOIA to withhold the evidential material used in its assessment of funding and overall sufficiency. The Commissioner also finds that section 35(1)(a) is engaged, however, the public interest lies in favour of disclosing the information. The Commissioner requires DHSC to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Provide the complainant with a copy of the information it withheld under section 35(1)(a). 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(1)(a): Complaint upheld FOI 21: Complaint not upheld FOI 41(1): Complaint not upheld