FS50189185: 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/2010/fs_50189185.pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fs_50189185.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 1 | |dnd_section=FOI 1 | ||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 10 | |dnd_section=FOI 10 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 22:37, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50189185
- Date: 2 March 2010
- Public Authority: Audit Commission
- Summary: The complainant requested information from the Audit Commission concerning the recording of discussions held or not held between the Audit Commission and the following public bodies: i. Huntingdon District Council ii. Cambridgeshire County Council iii. Cambridgeshire Constabulary iv. Ramsey Town Council v. The Commission for Local Administration. The Audit Commission initially failed to respond within the required 20 working days and as such failed to meet the requirements set out in section 10 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. With regards the information requested, the Audit Commission stated that it does not hold any information that falls within the terms of the request. The Commissioner has investigated the complaint and is satisfied that the Audit Commission does not hold information covered by the scope of the request and therefore that it complied with its obligations under section 1(1) of the Act.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 1 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 10 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
