FS50062881: 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" |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DNSummaryBox | {{DNSummaryBox | ||
|dn_ref=FS50062881 | |dn_ref=FS50062881 | ||
|dn_date= | |dn_date=7 July 2006 | ||
|dn_pa=Cabinet Office | |dn_pa=Cabinet Office | ||
|dn_summary=The complainant requested information related to the legal advice provided by the Attorney General to the Prime Minister on the legality of military action in Iraq. The public authority advised the complainant that some of the information requested was not held but was exempt under sections 35 and 42 of the Act. The Commissioner has decided that the public authority failed to comply with section 1(1)(a) within the 20 working day deadline and in doing so it contravened section 10(1). However, as the public authority subsequently confirmed that no information relevant to the first two parts of the request was held the Commissioner has not ordered any remedial steps in this regard. The Commissioner has also decided that the public authority appropriately applied the exemptions in section 35 and 42 and determined that the public interest favoured maintaining the exemptions. The Information Tribunal has ruled on this decision and has upheld this appeal. | |dn_summary=The complainant requested information related to the legal advice provided by the Attorney General to the Prime Minister on the legality of military action in Iraq. The public authority advised the complainant that some of the information requested was not held but was exempt under sections 35 and 42 of the Act. The Commissioner has decided that the public authority failed to comply with section 1(1)(a) within the 20 working day deadline and in doing so it contravened section 10(1). However, as the public authority subsequently confirmed that no information relevant to the first two parts of the request was held the Commissioner has not ordered any remedial steps in this regard. The Commissioner has also decided that the public authority appropriately applied the exemptions in section 35 and 42 and determined that the public interest favoured maintaining the exemptions. The Information Tribunal has ruled on this decision and has upheld this appeal. | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{DNDecision | {{DNDecision | ||
|1=FOI 10 | |dnd_section=FOI 1 | ||
| | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | |||
{{DNDecision | |||
|dnd_section=FOI 10 | |||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 22:22, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50062881
- Date: 7 July 2006
- Public Authority: Cabinet Office
- Summary: The complainant requested information related to the legal advice provided by the Attorney General to the Prime Minister on the legality of military action in Iraq. The public authority advised the complainant that some of the information requested was not held but was exempt under sections 35 and 42 of the Act. The Commissioner has decided that the public authority failed to comply with section 1(1)(a) within the 20 working day deadline and in doing so it contravened section 10(1). However, as the public authority subsequently confirmed that no information relevant to the first two parts of the request was held the Commissioner has not ordered any remedial steps in this regard. The Commissioner has also decided that the public authority appropriately applied the exemptions in section 35 and 42 and determined that the public interest favoured maintaining the exemptions. The Information Tribunal has ruled on this decision and has upheld this appeal.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 1 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 10 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
