FS50209658

Decision Summary

• Case Ref: FS50209658
• Date: 28 January 2010
• Public Authority: HM Revenue and Customs
• Summary: The complainant requested information that would explain the reasoning of the government for abolishing the professional trustee residence rule formerly provided by section 69(2) of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992. The public authority divided the request into two parts. In response to the first part of the request, the public authority stated that it held no relevant information. In response to the second part of the request, the public authority confirmed that it held relevant information, but refused to disclose this, citing the exemption provided by section 35(1)(a) (formulation and development of government policy). The Commissioner finds that the public authority stated incorrectly that it held no information falling within the first part of the request, but that the information that it holds that falls within the scope of this part of the request is exempt by virtue of section 42(1) (legal professional privilege) and that the public interest in the maintenance of this exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. In relation to the second part of the request, the Commissioner finds that the exemption provided by section 35(1)(a) is engaged and that the public interest in the maintenance of the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. The Commissioner further finds that the public authority failed to comply with the procedural requirements of sections 1(1)(a) and 17(1) in its handling of the request.
• View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]