FS50093302: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 21:04, 3 May 2010

Case Ref: FS50093302
Date: 30/08/2007
Public Authority: Ministry of Justice
Summary: nd that the DCA’s decision was in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act. However, he has also decided that the refusal notice issued by the public authority did not fully conform to the requirements of section 17 of the Act.
View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]

Section of Act / Finding: FOI 17 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions

Section of Act / Finding: FOI 35 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{DNSummaryBox
+	{{DNSummaryBox
 |dn_ref=FS50093302
 |dn_date=30/08/2007
 |dn_pa=Ministry of Justice
-|dn_summary=The complainant requested from the Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA), which has since been replaced by the Ministry of Justice, �the Attorney General�s advice over the �public interest� test and its interpretation under the Freedom of Information Act.� The DCA refused to confirm or deny whether it held the requested information, applying section 35(1)(c) of the Act (Law Officers� advice). The Commissioner has found that the DCA�s decision was in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act. However, he has also decided that the refusal notice issued by the public authority did not fully conform to the requirements of section 17 of the Act.
+|dn_summary=nd that the DCA’s decision was in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act. However, he has also decided that the refusal notice issued by the public authority did not fully conform to the requirements of section 17 of the Act.
 |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2007/fs50093302.pdf
 }}
 {{DNDecision
-|1=FOI 35
+|dnd_section=FOI 17
-|2=Not upheld
+|dnd_finding=Upheld
+}}
+{{DNDecision
+|dnd_section=FOI 35
+|dnd_finding=Not upheld
 }}