FS50064581: Difference between revisions

From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(CSV import)
 
m (Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision")
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{DNSummaryBox
{{DNSummaryBox
|dn_ref=FS50064581
|dn_ref=FS50064581
|dn_date=06/04/2006
|dn_date=6 April 2006
|dn_pa=Boston Borough Council
|dn_pa=Boston Borough Council
|dn_summary=The complainant requested a copy of a report, provided to the Council by a charitable company, relating to the charity's management of a sports arena, including financial and commercial information. The Council applied section 41 (information provided in confidence), and section 43 (commercial interests) and disclosure a redacted version; however, the Complainant wanted an unredacted copy of the report. The Commissioner found that a duty of confidence exists, and that the information was exempt from disclosure under section 41 of the Act as this would produce an actionable breach of that duty.
|dn_summary=The complainant requested a copy of a report, provided to the Council by a charitable company, relating to the charity's management of a sports arena, including financial and commercial information. The Council applied section 41 (information provided in confidence), and section 43 (commercial interests) and disclosure a redacted version; however, the Complainant wanted an unredacted copy of the report. The Commissioner found that a duty of confidence exists, and that the information was exempt from disclosure under section 41 of the Act as this would produce an actionable breach of that duty.
Line 7: Line 7:
}}
}}
{{DNDecision
{{DNDecision
|1=FOI 41
|dnd_section=FOI 41
|2=Not upheld
|dnd_finding=Not upheld
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 23:22, 15 May 2010


Decision Summary

  • Case Ref: FS50064581
  • Date: 6 April 2006
  • Public Authority: Boston Borough Council
  • Summary: The complainant requested a copy of a report, provided to the Council by a charitable company, relating to the charity's management of a sports arena, including financial and commercial information. The Council applied section 41 (information provided in confidence), and section 43 (commercial interests) and disclosure a redacted version; however, the Complainant wanted an unredacted copy of the report. The Commissioner found that a duty of confidence exists, and that the information was exempt from disclosure under section 41 of the Act as this would produce an actionable breach of that duty.
  • View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]