FS50246007: 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=Not upheld | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 16 | |dnd_section=FOI 16 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
Revision as of 22:13, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50246007
- Date: 1 March 2010
- Public Authority: Serious Fraud Office
- Summary: The complainant requested information relating to fraud in landed property. The Serious Fraud Office initially refused to disclose the information, citing section 21 (information accessible by other means) and section 31(1)(a) (law enforcement). In its internal review correspondence it referred to section 12 (cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit). The Commissioner is satisfied that it would exceed the cost limit for the Serious Fraud Office to comply with the request. However he identified procedural shortcomings on the part of the public authority relating to its provision of advice and assistance and in relation to its citing of section 12.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 16 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 17 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
