FS50072939: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) (CSV import) |
Alex skene (talk | contribs) m (Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision") |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DNSummaryBox | {{DNSummaryBox | ||
|dn_ref=FS50072939 | |dn_ref=FS50072939 | ||
|dn_date=12 | |dn_date=12 June 2006 | ||
|dn_pa=Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency | |dn_pa=Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency | ||
|dn_summary=The complainant requested names of individuals referred to in documents held by the MHRA about a specific product, rofecoxib. The MHRA refused to disclose this information on the grounds that it was exempt under section 38 (Health and Safety) and section 36 (Prejudice to the Effective Conduct of Public Affairs). The Commissioner has decided that section 38 has been correctly applied by the MHRA and that the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosure, and so the Agency was justified in withholding information revealing the names of individuals in a way that links them to a specific product, inspection or investigation. As the Commissioner decided that the information was exempt under section 38, he has considered the application of section 36 in Decision Notice. | |dn_summary=The complainant requested names of individuals referred to in documents held by the MHRA about a specific product, rofecoxib. The MHRA refused to disclose this information on the grounds that it was exempt under section 38 (Health and Safety) and section 36 (Prejudice to the Effective Conduct of Public Affairs). The Commissioner has decided that section 38 has been correctly applied by the MHRA and that the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosure, and so the Agency was justified in withholding information revealing the names of individuals in a way that links them to a specific product, inspection or investigation. As the Commissioner decided that the information was exempt under section 38, he has considered the application of section 36 in Decision Notice. | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{DNDecision | {{DNDecision | ||
| | |dnd_section=FOI 38 | ||
| | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 23:23, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50072939
- Date: 12 June 2006
- Public Authority: Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency
- Summary: The complainant requested names of individuals referred to in documents held by the MHRA about a specific product, rofecoxib. The MHRA refused to disclose this information on the grounds that it was exempt under section 38 (Health and Safety) and section 36 (Prejudice to the Effective Conduct of Public Affairs). The Commissioner has decided that section 38 has been correctly applied by the MHRA and that the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosure, and so the Agency was justified in withholding information revealing the names of individuals in a way that links them to a specific product, inspection or investigation. As the Commissioner decided that the information was exempt under section 38, he has considered the application of section 36 in Decision Notice.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 38 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
