FS50078514: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) XML import |
Alex skene (talk | contribs) m Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision" |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DNSummaryBox | |||
|dn_ref=FS50078514 | |dn_ref=FS50078514 | ||
|dn_date=31 | |dn_date=31 March 2009 | ||
|dn_pa=Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform | |dn_pa=Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform | ||
|dn_summary=. He found the DTI to have breached section 17(1) (b) and (c) by failing to apply section 36 by the completion of the internal review. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal. | |dn_summary=The complainant asked the then DTI for the names of creators of documents and folders on its internal Matrix electronic record and data management system. DTI refused to release the information, initially citing section 40 of the Act but later relying on 36 and 40. The Commissioner upheld the DTI’s decision that section 36(2)(c) was engaged in relation to all of the names of individuals who were creators of records on Matrix, and concluded that in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in releasing the information. He found the DTI to have breached section 17(1) (b) and (c) by failing to apply section 36 by the completion of the internal review. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal. | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2009/fs_50078514.pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2009/fs_50078514.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 22:23, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50078514
- Date: 31 March 2009
- Public Authority: Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
- Summary: The complainant asked the then DTI for the names of creators of documents and folders on its internal Matrix electronic record and data management system. DTI refused to release the information, initially citing section 40 of the Act but later relying on 36 and 40. The Commissioner upheld the DTI’s decision that section 36(2)(c) was engaged in relation to all of the names of individuals who were creators of records on Matrix, and concluded that in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in releasing the information. He found the DTI to have breached section 17(1) (b) and (c) by failing to apply section 36 by the completion of the internal review. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 17 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 36 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
