FS50171494: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) m Text replace - "DNDecision3" to "DNDecision" |
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/2009/fs_50171494.pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2009/fs_50171494.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 17 | |dnd_section=FOI 17 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 36 | |dnd_section=FOI 36 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
Latest revision as of 22:36, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50171494
- Date: 21 September 2009
- Public Authority: University of East Anglia
- Summary: The complainant requested information from the University of East Anglia relating to the University’s Transparent Approach to Costing (TRAC) system. The University replied to the request, refusing to release any information, citing exemption under section 41 (1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the “Act”), but informing the complainant of his right to a review and appeal. The complainant requested an internal review. Following the review, the University maintained its claim for exemption. This time, in addition to section 41 (1), it claimed exemption under sections 36 (2) (b) (ii) and 43 (2) of the Act. It also maintained that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information. The Commissioner has decided that all of the withheld information should be released. He holds that while section 36 (2) (b) (ii) is engaged, he has decided that in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption did not outweigh the public interest in disclosure. In addition, the Commissioner has decided that the exemptions under sections 41(1) and 43 (2) are not engaged in this case. The public authority had therefore breached section 1 (1) (b) in failing to disclose this information. In addition, in its dealings with the complainant, the University failed to cite the relevant subsections by completion of its internal review in breach of section 17 (1) (b). The Commissioner requires that the information be released within 35 days.
- 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 Upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 41 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 43 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
