FS50118284: 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 6: Line 6:
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2006/decision_notice_fs50118284.pdf
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2006/decision_notice_fs50118284.pdf
}}
}}
{{DNDecision1
{{DNDecision
|dnd_section=FOI 42
|dnd_section=FOI 42
|dnd_finding=Not upheld
|dnd_finding=Not upheld
}}
}}
{{DNDecision2
{{DNDecision
|dnd_section=FOI 17
|dnd_section=FOI 17
|dnd_finding=Upheld
|dnd_finding=Upheld
}}
}}
{{DNDecision3
{{DNDecision
|dnd_section=FOI 10
|dnd_section=FOI 10
|dnd_finding=Upheld
|dnd_finding=Upheld
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 23:27, 15 May 2010


Decision Summary

  • Case Ref: FS50118284
  • Date: 23 October 2006
  • Public Authority: Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
  • Summary: The complainant made a request for legislation applying to a particular situation. The public authority responded by detailing the legislation that applied and advising the complainant where he could obtain access to copies of this information. The complainant was dissatisfied with the public authority’s response and complained about this on two occasions. Within these complaints he also made two further requests for information. The public authority reviewed their response to the original request but did not provide any information in relation to the later requests. Following the Commissioner’s intervention the public authority responded to the later requests and refused to release some information under the section 42 exemption for legal professional privilege. The Commissioner’s decision is that the public authority breached section 17 and section 10 of the Act, and that the section 42 exemption is upheld.
  • View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]