FS50115678: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 21:06, 3 May 2010

Case Ref: FS50115678
Date: 23/05/2007
Public Authority: Driving Standards Agency
Summary: ion to withhold the information under section 36 (2) (c) of the Act, however, the Commissioner finds that the DSA breached section 17 of the Act in the handling of the request.
View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]

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

Section of Act / Finding: FOI 36 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{DNSummaryBox
+	{{DNSummaryBox
 |dn_ref=FS50115678
 |dn_date=23/05/2007
 |dn_pa=Driving Standards Agency
-|dn_summary=The complainant requested information from the Driving Standards Agency (the �DSA�) relating to the number of clicks permitted in the Hazard Perception Test of the UK Driving Theory test before the algorithm is activated. Initially the DSA did not treat the request as a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (�the Act�). Following the involvement of the Information Commissioner (�the Commissioner�) the DSA considered the matter under the provisions of the Act. The DSA further delayed before issuing a refusal notice, which stated that it was withholding the information under section 36 (2) (c) of the Act. The Commissioner upholds the DSA�s decision to withhold the information under section 36 (2) (c) of the Act, however, the Commissioner finds that the DSA breached section 17 of the Act in the handling of the request.
+|dn_summary=ion to withhold the information under section 36 (2) (c) of the Act, however, the Commissioner finds that the DSA breached section 17 of the Act in the handling of the request.
 |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2009/fs_50115678.pdf
 }}
 {{DNDecision
-|1=FOI 36
+|dnd_section=FOI 17
-|2=Not upheld
+|dnd_finding=Upheld
+}}
+{{DNDecision
+|dnd_section=FOI 36
+|dnd_finding=Not upheld
 }}