FS50182402: 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=FS50182402 | |dn_ref=FS50182402 | ||
|dn_date=16 | |dn_date=16 March 2009 | ||
|dn_pa=Department for Culture, Media and Sport | |dn_pa=Department for Culture, Media and Sport | ||
|dn_summary= | |dn_summary=The complainant requested from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) a copy of the report prepared by DCMS for the Culture Secretary on a potential bid for the 2012 Olympics. DCMS refused to disclose a copy of the report under section 35(1) (a) ‘formulation or development of government policy’. The Commissioner has investigated and found that section 35(1) (a) is engaged and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure of the information. However, the Commissioner also found that DCMS breached the requirements of section 17(1) and 17(3) of the Act as the refusal notice was issued outside of twenty working days. | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2009/fs_50182402.pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2009/fs_50182402.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision1 | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 17 | |dnd_section=FOI 17 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision2 | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 35 | |dnd_section=FOI 35 | ||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 21:29, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50182402
- Date: 16 March 2009
- Public Authority: Department for Culture, Media and Sport
- Summary: The complainant requested from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) a copy of the report prepared by DCMS for the Culture Secretary on a potential bid for the 2012 Olympics. DCMS refused to disclose a copy of the report under section 35(1) (a) ‘formulation or development of government policy’. The Commissioner has investigated and found that section 35(1) (a) is engaged and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure of the information. However, the Commissioner also found that DCMS breached the requirements of section 17(1) and 17(3) of the Act as the refusal notice was issued outside of twenty working days.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
