FS50142679: Difference between revisions

From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(CSV import)
m (Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision")
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 6: Line 6:
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/tools_and_resources/decision_notices.aspx?id=%7B9FE374F4-29D8-4034-A133-9B94F362CE2B%7D&ref=&authority=0&section=0&month=0&year=3&status=0
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/tools_and_resources/decision_notices.aspx?id=%7B9FE374F4-29D8-4034-A133-9B94F362CE2B%7D&ref=&authority=0&section=0&month=0&year=3&status=0
}}
}}
{{DNDecision1
{{DNDecision
|dnd_section=FOI 17
|dnd_section=FOI 17
|dnd_finding=Upheld
|dnd_finding=Upheld
}}
}}
{{DNDecision2
{{DNDecision
|dnd_section=FOI 40
|dnd_section=FOI 40
|dnd_finding=Not upheld
|dnd_finding=Not upheld
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 23:30, 15 May 2010


Decision Summary

  • Case Ref: FS50142679
  • Date: 5 December 2007
  • Public Authority: Ministry of Justice
  • Summary: The complainant requested a copy of the legal advice held by the public authority following a public consultation into proposed new legislation. The public authority refused to confirm or deny that any legal advice was held under sections 42 and 35 of the Act. The Commissioner investigated the application of the exemptions in relation to the neither confirm nor deny response and found that the public authority was correct in its application of section 42. This being the case, the Commissioner did not go on to consider the application of section 35. However, the Commissioner did find that the refusal notice issued in response to the initial request did not meet the requirements of section 17 of the Act. Information Tribunal appeal number EA/2008/0005 has been dismissed.
  • View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]