FS50209501: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) XML import |
Alex skene (talk | contribs) CSV import |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DNSummaryBox | |||
|dn_ref=FS50209501 | |dn_ref=FS50209501 | ||
|dn_date=31 | |dn_date=31 March 2010 | ||
|dn_pa=Torridge District Council | |dn_pa=Torridge District Council | ||
|dn_summary=The complainant requested sight of a file containing information regarding a Judicial Review (the | |dn_summary=The complainant requested sight of a file containing information regarding a Judicial Review (the “Judicial Review file”) concerning a dispute between Torridge District Council (the “Council”) and a third party. The Council cited section 42 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the “Act”) and refused the request. During the Commissioner’s investigation, and owing to the passage of time, the Council withdrew its reliance on section 42 and made the Judicial Review file available. However, the file did not contain any documentation that detailed the final outcome of the Judicial Review and the Council has confirmed that it does not hold this information. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold information of this description. The Commissioner has also concluded that since the request concerned environmental information the Council should have considered this request under the provisions of Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (the “EIR”) rather than the Act. | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fs_50209501.pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fs_50209501.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision1 | ||
|dnd_section=EIR 12(4)(a) | |dnd_section=EIR 12(4)(a) | ||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision2 | ||
|dnd_section=EIR 14(2) | |dnd_section=EIR 14(2) | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision3 | ||
|dnd_section=EIR 14(3) | |dnd_section=EIR 14(3) | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 21:19, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50209501
- Date: 31 March 2010
- Public Authority: Torridge District Council
- Summary: The complainant requested sight of a file containing information regarding a Judicial Review (the “Judicial Review file”) concerning a dispute between Torridge District Council (the “Council”) and a third party. The Council cited section 42 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the “Act”) and refused the request. During the Commissioner’s investigation, and owing to the passage of time, the Council withdrew its reliance on section 42 and made the Judicial Review file available. However, the file did not contain any documentation that detailed the final outcome of the Judicial Review and the Council has confirmed that it does not hold this information. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold information of this description. The Commissioner has also concluded that since the request concerned environmental information the Council should have considered this request under the provisions of Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (the “EIR”) rather than the Act.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
Template:DNDecision1 Template:DNDecision2 Template:DNDecision3
