Decision notices
Showing 1 to 25 of 22,532
Chief Constable of Staffordshire Police
4 Oct 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 35 calendar days in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
FOI 10: Complaint upheld
Bristol City Council
4 Oct 2024, Local government
The complainant has requested information from Bristol City Council (the Council) relating to a tender to become the Council’s ‘Digital Strategic Partner’ (DSP). The Council disclosed information with redactions made under sections 41 (information provided in confidence) and 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was correct to refuse the request under section 41 of FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
FOI 41: Complaint not upheld
London Borough of Lewisham
4 Oct 2024, Local government
The complainant submitted a multipart request to the London Borough of Lewisham (the Council) seeking information about works on the Dacres Estate. The Council provided information falling within the scope of the request but the complainant argued that it would hold additional recorded information. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities the Council does not hold any recorded information beyond that disclosed to the complainant. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
EIR 5: Complaint not upheld
Knutsford Town Council
4 Oct 2024, Local government
The complainant requested information relating to public rights of way at a woodland. Knutsford Town Council (the “Council”) initially handled the request under the FOIA, disclosing some information and withholding personal information under section 40. During the Commissioner’s investigation the Council reconsidered the request under the EIR and issued a new response which disclosed further information and applied regulation 13 to withhold personal information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on regulation 13 of the EIR to withhold the personal information but that it provided some of the requested information outside the time for compliance, failed to issue a refusal notice under the EIR in time and failed to carry out an internal review, breaching regulations 5(2), 14 and 11(4). The Commissioner does not require further steps.
EIR 11(4): Complaint upheld EIR 13: Complaint not upheld EIR 5(2): Complaint upheld EIR 14: Complaint upheld
United Utilities PLC
4 Oct 2024, Private companies
The complainant requested information from United Utilities Water Limited (the public authority). The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority breached regulation 5(2) of the EIR by failing to respond to the request within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken.
EIR 5(2): Complaint upheld
NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care
3 Oct 2024, Health
The complainant has requested information on an independent review commissioned by the ICB into allegations about a GP practice. The Commissioner’s decision is that the ICB has demonstrated that section 41 FOIA is engaged in relation to the withheld information and there is no public interest defence to a breach of confidence applicable. The information has therefore been correctly withheld. As the Commissioner has found that section 41 is engaged he has not gone on to consider the other exemptions cited and he requires no steps.
FOI 41: Complaint not upheld
London Borough of Lambeth
3 Oct 2024, Local government
A public authority will breach section 10 of FOIA if it fails to respond to a request within 20 working days. Based on evidence available to the Commissioner, by the date of this notice the public authority has not issued a substantive response to this request. Therefore the Commissioner finds a breach of section 10. 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
Greater London Authority
3 Oct 2024, Local government
The complainant submitted a multipart request to the Greater London Authority (GLA) seeking information about the decision to select the proposal ‘Antelope’ by Samson Kambalu for the Fourth Plinth in Trafalgar Square. The GLA responded to some parts of the request, but in relation to part 2 of the request it refused to confirm or deny whether it held any information on the basis of section 38(2) (health and safety) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the GLA is entitled to rely on section 38(2) to refuse to confirm or deny whether it holds any information falling within the scope of this part of the request. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
FOI 38: Complaint not upheld
Lincolnshire County Council
3 Oct 2024, Local government
The complainant has requested information from Lincolnshire County Council (“the council”) in relation to a plan to install a road crossing. The council provided information in response to the request, however the complainant argues that further information will be held by it. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the council holds no further information falling within the scope of the complainant's request for information. The Commissioner does not require the council to take any steps.
EIR 5(1): Complaint not upheld
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
3 Oct 2024, Central government
The complainant submitted a request to Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) seeking correspondence between it and Linacre College, Oxford regarding the proposed donation from Nguyen Thi Phuong Thao to the college. The FCDO disclosed information in response to the request but redacted parts of it on the basis of sections 27(1)(a), (c) and (d) (international relations), 40(2) (personal data), 41(1) (information provided in confidence) and 43(2) (commercial interest) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the redacted information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of the exemptions cited by the FCDO. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
FOI 43: Complaint not upheld FOI 40: Complaint not upheld FOI 27: Complaint not upheld FOI 41: Complaint not upheld
Anthem Schools Trust (formerly CfBT Schools Trust)
3 Oct 2024, Education
The Commissioner’s decision is that Anthem Schools Trust (‘the Trust’) is entitled to refuse the complainant’s request for information about special educational needs and disability support under section 14(1) of FOIA. The request can be categorised as a vexatious request, and it was submitted as part of a campaign against the Trust. The Trust is also entitled to refuse the request under section 12(1) of FOIA as complying with it would exceed the appropriate cost limit. There was no breach of section 16(1), which concerns advice and assistance. It’s not necessary for the Trust to take any corrective steps.
FOI 12(1): Complaint not upheld FOI 14(1): Complaint not upheld FOI 16(1): Complaint not upheld
London Borough of Barnet Council
3 Oct 2024, Local government
The complainant has made two requests to London Borough of Barnet (‘the Council’) about the funding bid and expected income for the JOLT electric vehicle charging point scheme. The Council provided some of the requested information but relied on section 43(2) of FOIA to withhold the redacted sections of the requested bid document. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was entitled to rely on section 43(2) of FOIA to withhold some of the requested information. He also finds that the Council breached sections 10(1) and 17(1) of FOIA by failing to provide a refusal notice to the requests within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require further formal steps. However, if it has not already done so, the Council should disclose the updated version of the redacted bid document to the complainant as planned.
FOI 17: Complaint upheld FOI 43: Complaint not upheld FOI 10: Complaint upheld
Cabinet Office
3 Oct 2024, Central government
The complainant has requested information about the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union. The Cabinet Office refused to comply with the request, citing section 12 (cost limit) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Cabinet Office was entitled to refuse to comply with the request in accordance with section 12(1) of FOIA. The Commissioner also finds that the Cabinet Office complied with its obligations under section 16 to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
FOI 12(2): Complaint upheld
Middlewich Town Council
3 Oct 2024, Local government
Summary wording for website: The complainant requested information from Middlewich Town Council about tendering for an HR Consultant. 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 section 10 of FOIA. The Commissioner requires the public authority to issue a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA.
FOI 10: Complaint upheld
Armagh City, Banbridge & Craigavon Borough Council
3 Oct 2024, Local government
The complainant requested from Armagh City Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council (the Council) information about a report relating to a meeting at the Orchard Leisure Centre Armagh. The Council stated that it does not hold the information as described in the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold information falling within scope of the request, and it has complied with section 1(1)(a) of FOIA. Therefore, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision.
FOI 1(1)(a): Complaint not upheld
Cabinet Office
3 Oct 2024, Central government
The complainant has requested information linked to the Covid-19 Strategy committee meetings held from 2020 to 2021. The Cabinet Office (“[the public authority]”) initially refused the request in reliance on FOIA section 35(1)(b) – Ministerial communications. The UK Covid-19 Inquiry published information in the scope of the request which led to the Cabinet Office also relying on FOIA section 21 – information accessible to the applicant by other means. The Commissioner’s decision is that some of the information has been appropriately withheld under FOIA section 35(1)(b) whilst the public interest favours disclosure of other information. The Commissioner finds that the Cabinet Office correctly relied on FOIA section 21(1) to withhold some of the information in the scope of the request. The Commissioner requires the Cabinet Office to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation - Disclose the information set out in the confidential annex to this notice. 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 FOI 21: Complaint not upheld
Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS)
3 Oct 2024, Central government
The complainant has requested information about the repeal of section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013. The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) relied on section 35 (formulation or development of government policy) to withhold the requested information from the complainant. The Commissioner’s decision is that the exemption at section 35 is engaged but he finds that the public interest in maintaining the exemption does not outweigh the public interest in disclosure. The Commissioner requires DCMS to disclose the information falling within the scope of the request, subject to any appropriate redactions for personal data.
FOI 35(1)(a): Complaint upheld
Cabinet Office
3 Oct 2024, Central government
The complainant submitted three requests to the Cabinet Office each seeking a file containing records of the Ministerial Committee on Animal Rights Activists. The Cabinet Office initially withheld each file on the basis of sections 23(1) (security bodies) and 24(1) (national security) (cited in the alternative) and sections 31(1)(a) to (c) (law enforcement). During the course of the Commissioner’s investigation the Cabinet Office withdrew its application of sections 31(1)(a) to (c), and for two of the files cited section 22(1) (information intended for future publication), and for the third file explained that at the time of the request, save for some retained material, the file in question was not held. The Commissioner has concluded that the Cabinet Office can rely on sections 23(1) and 24(1) in the manner in which it has and that section 40(2) also applies to some information; that section 22(1) applies to only one of the files; and that the remaining two files – save for the retained material – were not held at the time of the request.
FOI 40: Complaint not upheld FOI 24: Complaint not upheld FOI 22: Complaint partly upheld FOI 23: Complaint not upheld
Public Health Wales
2 Oct 2024, Health
The complainant requested a copy of the final report following an investigation into the cluster of Endovirus causing Myocarditis in young babies. Public Health Wales NHS Trust (PHW) withheld the information requested under section 22 (information intended for future publication) of the FOIA . The Commissioner’s decision is that section 22 (information intended for future publication) of the FOIA is not engaged as, at the time of the request, the information requested was not held. In failing to confirm that the information requested was not held and for failing to confirm the information was not held within the statutory time period, the Commissioner finds that PHW breached sections 1 and 10 of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require any steps to be taken.
FOI 10: Complaint upheld FOI 22: Complaint upheld FOI 1: Complaint upheld
Department for Work and Pensions
2 Oct 2024, Central government
The complainant has requested guidance regarding ‘Managed Migration’. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has identified all of the information falling within the scope of the request. For the information that DWP has withheld, he finds that whilst section 35(1)(a), formulation or development of government policy, is engaged, the balance of the public interest favours disclosure. The Commissioner requires DWP to disclose the withheld information. 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
Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary
2 Oct 2024, Police and criminal justice
In a series of requests, the complainant requested information relating to a specific investigation. Hampshire Constabulary neither confirmed nor denied holding the requested information, citing sections 40(5) (personal information) and 30(3) (investigations and proceedings) of FOIA. The Commissioner investigated Hampshire Constabulary’s application of section 30(3) to the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that Hampshire Constabulary is entitled to rely on section 30(3) of FOIA to refuse to confirm or deny whether it holds any information falling within the scope of the requests. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken as a result of this decision.
FOI 30: Complaint not upheld
Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem)
2 Oct 2024, Other
The complainant has requested copies of design proposal submissions for the Redcar Hydrogen Village Trial, any revisions to design proposals and a summary of proposals to offer electric alternatives to residents. Ofgem relied on regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR (manifestly unreasonable) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that Ofgem was entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR to refuse the request. He also finds that Ofgem complied with regulation 9(1) of the EIR. The Commissioner does not require further steps.
EIR 9: Complaint not upheld EIR 12(4)(b): Complaint not upheld
London Borough of Haringey Council
2 Oct 2024, Local government
The Commissioner finds a breach of section 10. 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
Cherwell District Council
2 Oct 2024, Local government
The complainant has requested all held information referring to Data Protection and Freedom of Information matters, and correspondence with the ICO, for the calendar year of 2023. Cherwell District Council initially withheld the information under the exemptions provided by sections 31(1)(g) (Law enforcement), 40(2) (Personal information), and 42(1) (Legal professional privilege), and subsequently indicated at internal review that it considered the request would engage section 12 (Cost of compliance). During the course of investigation, the Council informed the Commissioner that it wished to rely upon section 14(1) (Vexatious requests) on the grounds of burden, and section 12 in the alternative. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to refuse to comply with the request under section 14(1). However, in failing to issue a refusal notice within the statutory timescale, the Council breached section 17(5) (Refusal of request). The Commissioner does not require further steps but refers the Council to the points raised in ‘Other matters’.
FOI 14(1): Complaint not upheld FOI 17(5): Complaint upheld
Somerset Council
1 Oct 2024, Local government
The complainant requested road safety audit reports for a specified highway improvement scheme. Somerset Council (the ‘Council’) ultimately considered the request under the EIR. It said there had been no Stage 1 Audit and provided a copy of the Stage 2 Audit Report. It cited Regulation 12(4)(d) of the EIR (the exception for material in the course of completion, unfinished documents and incomplete data) in relation to the requested Stage 3 report. The complainant’s remaining concerns centred on the withheld Stage 3 report. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was correct to handle the request under the EIR. He also finds that the Council has properly relied on Regulation 12(4)(d) of the EIR to withhold the requested Stage 3 report. No steps are required as a result of this notice.
EIR 12(4)(d): Complaint not upheld