FS50102436: Difference between revisions

From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(XML import)
m (Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision")
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{DNSummaryBox
{{DNSummaryBox
|dn_ref=FS50102436
|dn_ref=FS50102436
|dn_date=16/10/2007
|dn_date=16 October 2007
|dn_pa=Commission for Equality and Human Rights
|dn_pa=Commission for Equality and Human Rights
|dn_summary=nformation it breached section 1 of the Act. However, the Commissioner accepts that to provide this information would have exceeded the appropriate cost limit.
|dn_summary=The complainant submitted a request for information about the ethnicity of claimants to the Employment Tribunal Service and the outcome of each claimant’s case. The public authority refused the request on the basis that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner has concluded that the public authority did hold some information which fell within the scope of the complainant’s request and by failing to confirm that it held this information it breached section 1 of the Act. However, the Commissioner accepts that to provide this information would have exceeded the appropriate cost limit.
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2007/fs_50102436.pdf
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2007/fs_50102436.pdf
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 23:26, 15 May 2010


Decision Summary

  • Case Ref: FS50102436
  • Date: 16 October 2007
  • Public Authority: Commission for Equality and Human Rights
  • Summary: The complainant submitted a request for information about the ethnicity of claimants to the Employment Tribunal Service and the outcome of each claimant’s case. The public authority refused the request on the basis that it did not hold the requested information. The Commissioner has concluded that the public authority did hold some information which fell within the scope of the complainant’s request and by failing to confirm that it held this information it breached section 1 of the Act. However, the Commissioner accepts that to provide this information would have exceeded the appropriate cost limit.
  • View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]