FS50092311: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) CSV import |
Alex skene (talk | contribs) m Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision" |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2007/fs_50092311.pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2007/fs_50092311.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 31 | |dnd_section=FOI 31 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 36 | |dnd_section=FOI 36 | ||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 22:25, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50092311
- Date: 27 September 2007
- Public Authority: Financial Services Authority
- Summary: The Complainant requested the letter sent by the FSA to Tony Blair following the Prime Ministers speech in June 2005 and any documents relating to the letter. The FSA refused to disclose the information under section 31 and 36 of the Act, in applying the public interest test the FSA concluded that the public interest lay in maintaining the exemption. During the course of the investigation the FSA disclosed the letter but redacted two sentences, the Commissioner’s investigation therefore only relates to the two redacted sentences. The Commissioner investigated the FSA’s application of the exemptions and found that the exemption at section 31 of the Act was not engaged. The Commissioner found that the exemption at section 36 of the Act was engaged and that the public interest favoured maintaining the exemption.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 31 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 36 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
