From FOIwiki
Revision as of 20:25, 15 May 2010 by Alex skene (talk | contribs) (Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Decision Summary

  • Case Ref: FS50092946
  • Date: 7 February 2007
  • Public Authority: Canterbury City Council
  • Summary: The complainant made a request for all the information held by specific departments of the public authority that contained a reference to his companies. The public authority supplied some information; however the complainant believed that the public authority held further information. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority has complied with section 1(1)(b) and section 12 as it acted reasonably in conducting proper searches and the cost of retrieving electronic information would exceed the appropriate limit. However, the public authority has breached section 10; time for compliance and section 1(1)(a) in relation to specific financial details. It has also misapplied section 42 (legal professional privilege) to some information.
  • View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]