FS50093445: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) m Text replace - "DNDecision3" to "DNDecision" |
Alex skene (talk | contribs) m Text replace - "DNDecision2" to "DNDecision" |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 27 | |dnd_section=FOI 27 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
Revision as of 22:06, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50093445
- Date: 4 February 2008
- Public Authority: Cabinet Office
- Summary: The complainant asked the public authority for information about steel trade tariffs. The Cabinet Office withheld the information as exempt under section 44 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (‘the Act’), citing a statutory bar created by Article 19(5) of the basic European Community Anti-Dumping Regulation (Regulation (EC) No 384/96). As a result of the Commissioner’s investigation the public authority released some information, but added section 27(1)(a) and (c) as an exemption in relation to part of the remainder. The Commissioner decided that section 44 did not apply to the information which the public authority was continuing to withhold because the information did not fall within the cited Regulation. He also decided that section 27(1)(a) and (c) was not engaged because there was no reasonable likelihood of prejudice. He therefore required the public authority to release the remaining information. The Commissioner also decided that the public authority had breached section 17(1) of the Act because it took 69 working days to respond to the request.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 27 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 44 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
