FS50235016: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) m Text replace - "DNDecision2" to "DNDecision" |
Alex skene (talk | contribs) m Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision" |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fs_50235016 .pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fs_50235016 .pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 10 | |dnd_section=FOI 10 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
Latest revision as of 22:39, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50235016
- Date: 4 March 2010
- Public Authority: Rotherham NHS Foundation Trust
- Summary: The complainant made a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the “Act”) to the Rotherham NHS Foundation Trust (the “Trust”) for a copy of the monthly update and the business development quarterly update from the Board of Directors meeting held on Thursday 24 July 2008. The Trust provided the information to the complainant with a number of redactions made under section 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii). Upon the commencement of the Commissioner’s investigation some of the redactions were removed and therefore some further information was provided to the complainant. The Commissioner has reviewed the remaining redactions and considers that the Trust correctly applied the section 36(2)(b)(ii) exemption. The Commissioner does however consider that the Trust breached section 1(1)(b) and section 10(1) in its handling of the request.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: .pdf
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 10 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 36 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
