FS50106712: Difference between revisions

From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(CSV import)
 
m (Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision")
 
(5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{DNSummaryBox
{{DNSummaryBox
|dn_ref=FS50106712
|dn_ref=FS50106712
|dn_date=11/08/2008
|dn_date=11 August 2008
|dn_pa=Financial Services Authority
|dn_pa=Financial Services Authority
|dn_summary=On 7 March 2005 the complainant requested a copy of information from the Financial Services Authority (FSA) regarding his investment in Fiox Limited. This information would originally have been held by the FSA�s predecessor, Investment Management Regulatory Organisation (IMRO). The FSA refused the request, applying the exemptions under sections 43(2) and 44, and subsequently sections 40(2), 21 and 31(1) (g). After investigation, the Commissioner considers that the FSA correctly applied the exemptions under sections 21, 40(2) and 44. In relation to sections 31(1) (g) and 43(2), the Commissioner has decided that the FSA was incorrect to apply these exemptions and orders the FSA to disclose to the complainant any information requested which was withheld on the basis of them. Finally the Commissioner finds that the FSA was in breach of section 17 of the Act in failing to state in its refusal notice and on internal review all the exemptions it subsequently applied. Information Tribunal appeal numbers (EA/2008/0075, EA/2008/0077) have been dismissed.
|dn_summary=On 7 March 2005 the complainant requested a copy of information from the Financial Services Authority (FSA) regarding his investment in Fiox Limited. This information would originally have been held by the FSA’s predecessor, Investment Management Regulatory Organisation (IMRO). The FSA refused the request, applying the exemptions under sections 43(2) and 44, and subsequently sections 40(2), 21 and 31(1) (g). After investigation, the Commissioner considers that the FSA correctly applied the exemptions under sections 21, 40(2) and 44. In relation to sections 31(1) (g) and 43(2), the Commissioner has decided that the FSA was incorrect to apply these exemptions and orders the FSA to disclose to the complainant any information requested which was withheld on the basis of them. Finally the Commissioner finds that the FSA was in breach of section 17 of the Act in failing to state in its refusal notice and on internal review all the exemptions it subsequently applied. Information Tribunal appeal numbers (EA/2008/0075, EA/2008/0077) have been dismissed.
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2008/fs_50106712.pdf
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2008/fs_50106712.pdf
}}
}}
{{DNDecision
{{DNDecision
|1=FOI 17
|dnd_section=FOI 44
|2=Upheld
|dnd_finding=Not upheld
}}
{{DNDecision
|dnd_section=FOI 31
|dnd_finding=Upheld
}}
{{DNDecision
|dnd_section=FOI 43
|dnd_finding=Upheld
}}
{{DNDecision
|dnd_section=FOI 17
|dnd_finding=Upheld
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 22:26, 15 May 2010


Decision Summary

  • Case Ref: FS50106712
  • Date: 11 August 2008
  • Public Authority: Financial Services Authority
  • Summary: On 7 March 2005 the complainant requested a copy of information from the Financial Services Authority (FSA) regarding his investment in Fiox Limited. This information would originally have been held by the FSA’s predecessor, Investment Management Regulatory Organisation (IMRO). The FSA refused the request, applying the exemptions under sections 43(2) and 44, and subsequently sections 40(2), 21 and 31(1) (g). After investigation, the Commissioner considers that the FSA correctly applied the exemptions under sections 21, 40(2) and 44. In relation to sections 31(1) (g) and 43(2), the Commissioner has decided that the FSA was incorrect to apply these exemptions and orders the FSA to disclose to the complainant any information requested which was withheld on the basis of them. Finally the Commissioner finds that the FSA was in breach of section 17 of the Act in failing to state in its refusal notice and on internal review all the exemptions it subsequently applied. Information Tribunal appeal numbers (EA/2008/0075, EA/2008/0077) have been dismissed.
  • View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]