FS50192677: 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 | {{DNSummaryBox | ||
|dn_ref=FS50192677 | |dn_ref=FS50192677 | ||
|dn_date=16 | |dn_date=16 March 2010 | ||
|dn_pa=Ministry of Defence | |dn_pa=Ministry of Defence | ||
|dn_summary=The complainant requested from the Ministry of Defence a copy of the movement order issued to the Ministry of Defence Special Escort Group, Fleet Protection Group Royal Marines, Defence Logistics Organisation Nuclear Movements Team and staff from AWE plc, in relation to the nuclear warhead which travelled from AWE Aldermaston / Burghfield to RNAD Coulport and back in January 2007.The Ministry of Defence relied on section 24 (National security) and section 26 (Defence) not to communicate the information to the complainant. The Commissioner found that the exemption was engaged and that the public interest test weighed in favour of the maintenance of the exemption. However, the Commissioner decided that the Ministry of | |dn_summary=The complainant requested from the Ministry of Defence a copy of the movement order issued to the Ministry of Defence Special Escort Group, Fleet Protection Group Royal Marines, Defence Logistics Organisation Nuclear Movements Team and staff from AWE plc, in relation to the nuclear warhead which travelled from AWE Aldermaston / Burghfield to RNAD Coulport and back in January 2007.The Ministry of Defence relied on section 24 (National security) and section 26 (Defence) not to communicate the information to the complainant. The Commissioner found that the exemption was engaged and that the public interest test weighed in favour of the maintenance of the exemption. However, the Commissioner decided that the Ministry of Defence’s public interest test determination was in breach of section 17(3) and there were further breaches of sections 17(1) and 17(1)(b). The Commissioner also expressed his concern at the public authority’s lateness in completing the internal review. | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fs_50192677.pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fs_50192677.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision1 | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 17 | |dnd_section=FOI 17 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision2 | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 24 | |dnd_section=FOI 24 | ||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision3 | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 26 | |dnd_section=FOI 26 | ||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 21:18, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50192677
- Date: 16 March 2010
- Public Authority: Ministry of Defence
- Summary: The complainant requested from the Ministry of Defence a copy of the movement order issued to the Ministry of Defence Special Escort Group, Fleet Protection Group Royal Marines, Defence Logistics Organisation Nuclear Movements Team and staff from AWE plc, in relation to the nuclear warhead which travelled from AWE Aldermaston / Burghfield to RNAD Coulport and back in January 2007.The Ministry of Defence relied on section 24 (National security) and section 26 (Defence) not to communicate the information to the complainant. The Commissioner found that the exemption was engaged and that the public interest test weighed in favour of the maintenance of the exemption. However, the Commissioner decided that the Ministry of Defence’s public interest test determination was in breach of section 17(3) and there were further breaches of sections 17(1) and 17(1)(b). The Commissioner also expressed his concern at the public authority’s lateness in completing the internal review.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
Template:DNDecision1 Template:DNDecision2 Template:DNDecision3
