1. FS50846273

    The complainant requested from Beccles Town Council (the Council) information regarding the legal advice relating to parking on Beccles Common. The Council refused the request under section 42(1) (legal professional privilege) of the FOIA. During the Commissioner’s investigation the Council reconsidered the request under the EIR and applied the exceptions for material in the course of completion (regulation 12(4)(d)), the course of justice (regulation 12(5)(b)) and protection of the environment (regulation 12(5)(g)) to withhold the information. The Commissioner finds that the Council initially handled the request incorrectly under the FOIA and in so doing breached regulation 5(1) and regulation 14(1) of the EIR. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council correctly applied regulation 12(5)(b) (course of justice) to the withheld information. Therefore, the Commissioner does not require the Council to take any steps as a result of this decision.  
  2. FS50851987

    The complainant has requested information from Westminster City Council (“the Council”) regarding costs and details of work completed on a specific property in the borough. The Council responded to say it has provided the information it held within the scope of the request but the complainant believes that there is more. The Commissioner’s decision is that, based on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold further information that would fall within the scope of the request. However, as the Council responded to the request after 20 working days and released further information even later, it has breached section 10 and section 1 of the FOIA. The Commissioner requires no further steps to be taken by the Council.
  3. FS50856265

    The complainant has requested information regarding animal right activists. The Attorney General’s Office did not comply with the request, citing section 12(1) (costs exceeding the cost limit) of the FOIA. The Commissioner’s decision is that although section 12 of the FOIA applies, the Attorney General’s Office should have applied section 12(2) (‘neither confirm nor deny’ on cost grounds) of the FOIA. The Commissioner does not require the Attorney General’s Office to take any steps as a result of this decision.`
  4. FER0900568

    The complainant has requested the publication details for two ‘Article 13’ planning application notices. The Commissioner’s decision is that on the balance of probabilities, Arun District Council has located all the information held in scope of the request. The Commissioner does not require any steps.
  5. FS50760398

    The complainant submitted a request to the Cabinet Office seeking information about the UK’s funding of certain projects in Bahrain. The Cabinet Office confirmed that it held some information falling within the scope of the request but considered this to be exempt from disclosure on the basis of sections 27(1)(a), (c) and (d) (international relations) and 43(2) (commercial interests) of FOIA. The Cabinet Office also sought to refuse to confirm or deny whether it held any further information falling within the scope of the request on the basis of the exemptions contained at sections 23(5) (security bodies) and 24(2) (national security) of FOIA. The Commissioner has concluded that the Cabinet Office is entitled to rely on sections 27(1)(a), (c) and (d) to withhold the information. She has also concluded that the Cabinet Office is entitled to rely on sections 23(5) and 24(2) to refuse to confirm or deny whether it holds any further information.