Difference between revisions of "FS50123488"

From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(CSV import)
 
(XML import)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{DNSummaryBox
+
{{DNSummaryBox
 
|dn_ref=FS50123488
 
|dn_ref=FS50123488
 
|dn_date=14/04/2008
 
|dn_date=14/04/2008
 
|dn_pa=Financial Services Authority
 
|dn_pa=Financial Services Authority
|dn_summary=The complainant made two requests for information to the Financial Services Authority (FSA) for information relating to a managing agency, his syndicate and Lloyd�s. The FSA refused to disclose the information requested in the first request under section 12 of the Act and the information requested in the second request under sections 44, 43, 40 and 31 of the Act. The Commissioner investigated and found that the FSA were correct to rely on section 12 to withhold the information requested in the first request. In relation to the second request the Commissioner has found that sections 44 and 40 are engaged but that sections 43 and 31 are not. The Commissioner requires the FSA to disclose the information withheld under sections 43 and 31 within 35 calendar days of this notice. This decision is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
+
|dn_summary=ar days of this notice. This decision is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
 
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2008/fs_50123488.pdf
 
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2008/fs_50123488.pdf
 
}}
 
}}
 
{{DNDecision
 
{{DNDecision
|1=FOI 17
+
|dnd_section=FOI 44
|2=Upheld
+
|dnd_finding=Not upheld
 +
}}
 +
{{DNDecision
 +
|dnd_section=FOI 40
 +
|dnd_finding=Not upheld
 +
}}
 +
{{DNDecision
 +
|dnd_section=FOI 1
 +
|dnd_finding=Upheld
 +
}}
 +
{{DNDecision
 +
|dnd_section=FOI 43
 +
|dnd_finding=Upheld
 +
}}
 +
{{DNDecision
 +
|dnd_section=FOI 17
 +
|dnd_finding=Upheld
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 19:06, 3 May 2010


Decision Summary

  • Case Ref: FS50123488
  • Date: 14/04/2008
  • Public Authority: Financial Services Authority
  • Summary: ar days of this notice. This decision is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
  • View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]