https://ico.org.uk/global/rss-feeds/decision-notices/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-290877-r0n9/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-290877-r0n9/ The complainant has requested information from Greater Manchester Police (“GMP”) regarding people detained under UK immigration legislation. GMP relied on section 12 of FOIA (cost of compliance) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that GMP was entitled to rely on section 12(1) of FOIA to refuse the request. The Commissioner finds that GMP complied with its section 16 obligation to offer advice and assistance. The Commissioner also finds that GMP breached section 10(1) by failing to respond to the request within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken. Fri, 14 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-299647-n3d9/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-299647-n3d9/ The complainant requested information from the London Borough of Bromley (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 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. Fri, 14 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-281839-c8b5/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-281839-c8b5/ The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (‘the Trust’) doesn’t hold the requested information about a named individual’s involvement decision-making. The Trust complied with section 1(1) of FOIA, and it doesn’t need to take any steps. Fri, 14 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-293247-c3r9/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-293247-c3r9/ 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. Fri, 14 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-298703-t8f7/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-298703-t8f7/ The complainant has requested information from HM Treasury (HMT regarding the application and granting of specific licences by the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation. HMT refused to confirm or deny whether it held any information falling within the scope of the request on the basis of sections 40(5B)(a)(i) (personal data), 41(2) (information provided in confidence) and 43(3) (commercial interests) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that HMT is entitled to rely on sections 40(5B)(a)(i) and 41(2) to neither confirm nor deny whether information falling within the scope of the request is held. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Fri, 14 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-305018-g4s6/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-305018-g4s6/ The complainant requested information from the BBC about editorial decisions involving Julian Assange. The BBC had yet to respond at the date of this notice. The Commissioner finds that as the BBC failed to respond to the request, it breached section 10(1) of FOIA. However he is also satisfied that this information, if held at all, would be held by the BBC for the purposes of journalism, art or literature and so would not be covered by FOIA. The Commissioner does not require further steps to be taken. Fri, 14 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-300819-g0v8/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-300819-g0v8/ The complainant requested information from the University of Manchester (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 obligations 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. Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-290727-r4t6/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-290727-r4t6/ The complainant requested information from Kent County Council (“the Council”) relating to a specific verge and tree. The Council refused the request under regulation 12(4)(b) (manifestly unreasonable) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council is entitled to rely on regulation 12(4)(b) to refuse to comply with the request. However, he also finds that the Council breached regulation 11 (reconsideration) of the EIR by failing to provide the complainant with the outcome of its internal review within 40 working days. The Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps. Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-288272-h1l5/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-288272-h1l5/ The complainant has requested information relating to a consultation run by the Department of Health and Social Care entitled “Creating a smokefree generation and tackling youth vaping". The Department of Health and Social Care (‘DHSC’) provided links to the requested information that was already available, advised that some information was not held and that it was relying on section 27(2) of FOIA (international relations) and section 35 of FOIA (formulation of government policy) to withhold the remainder of the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that DHSC was entitled to rely on section 27(2) of FOIA to withhold some of the information concerning question two of the request. The Commissioner does not require further steps. Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-305863-c4x5/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-305863-c4x5/ The complainant requested information from Weston College Corporation (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 provide a substantive response to the request in accordance with its obligations under FOIA. Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-278629-h4k2/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-278629-h4k2/ The complainant submitted a request for information held by Herefordshire Council (the council) about the legal status of a particular area of land. The council aggregated the request with a number of other requests submitted by the complainant and issued a refusal notice, citing section 12 (cost limits) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). During the Commissioner’s investigation, the council revised its position, and provided the complainant with information in response to all seven parts of their request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council should have initially considered the request under the EIR. However, he considers that the council has, on the balance of probabilities, now provided the complainant with the information that is held that falls within the scope of the request. Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-293267-h9y6/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-293267-h9y6/ The public authority has failed to respond to this request within 20 working days, as specified under 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. Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-284599-j6v8/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-284599-j6v8/ The complainant has requested information in relation to speed cameras. The Commissioner’s decision is that Bournemouth Christchurch and Poole Council (the council) breached section 10(1) of the FOIA as it did not respond to the request within the required 20 working days set out in the FOIA. As the council has since responded, the Commissioner does not require any steps. Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-295870-x1c6/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-295870-x1c6/ The complainant has requested from Dr Julian Medical Group Limited (the public authority) the name of a complaint investigator’s professional membership body. The public authority applied section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious request) to refuse the request. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority was not entitled to rely on section 14(1) in refusing to provide the requested information. As the complainant has since obtained the requested information it is therefore not necessary for the public authority to take any steps. Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-278083-p5l6/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-278083-p5l6/ The complainant submitted a two part request to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) seeking equalities information in relation to: (1) DWP’s proposed policy to remove the Work Capability Assessment and (2) information about DWP’s equality publication duties. DWP refused to provide the information for part one of the request arguing it was exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 35(1)(a) of FOIA (formulation or development of government policy) and that the public interest favoured maintaining the exemption. In relation to part two, DWP argued that the information was exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 21 (information accessible to the applicant by other means) and section 22 (information intended for future publication). The Commissioner’s decision is that the withheld information in part one of the request is exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 35(1)(a) but the public interest favours disclosure of the information. For part two, the information is exempt from disclosure on the basis of section 21. The Commissioner requires the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: • Disclose the information falling within the scope of request 1. 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. Wed, 12 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-280120-m6r8/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-280120-m6r8/ The complainant has requested a deep dive report into primary care in Buckinghamshire. Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire & West Berkshire (BOB) Integrated Care Board (ICB) (“the public authority”) refused the request, citing section 36(2)(b)(ii) and 36(2)(c) (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs) of FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that the report engages section 36(2)(b)(ii) but the balance of the public interest lies in disclosure. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: disclose the report. Wed, 12 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-283697-j8j5/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-283697-j8j5/ The complainant has requested copies of studies and reports held by a named professor that provide evidence of the existence of SARS-COV-2. The University of Sheffield (‘the University’) refused the request under section 14(1) of FOIA (vexatious requests). The Commissioner’s decision is that the University has incorrectly applied section 14(1) to categorise the request as vexatious. The Commissioner requires the University to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the requested information or issue a fresh response to the complainant’s request that does not rely on section 14(1). Wed, 12 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-282132-q3y3/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-282132-q3y3/ The complainant has requested information about a contract with a third party to refurbish a Council building. Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (the Council) disclosed some information but withheld information which would reveal the pricing structure applied, citing section 43 (Commercial interests). It said that it did not hold information about future payments. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council applied section 43 correctly, and, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold the remaining information. Wed, 12 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-289648-y1z0/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-289648-y1z0/ The complainant has requested certain information from the incident database, held by the Home Office. The Home Office provided some information but initially withheld the remainder, citing sections 38(1) (Health and safety) and 40(2) (Personal information) of FOIA. During the Commissioner’s investigation, the Home Office disclosed the remaining information, in line with the complainant’s request. The complainant disputed the extent of what was requested and asked for further information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has complied with the request. He does not require further steps. Wed, 12 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-304567-z6m9/https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/ic-304567-z6m9/ 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. Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0100