FS50142680: Difference between revisions

From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(XML import)
(CSV import)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{DNSummaryBox
{{DNSummaryBox
|dn_ref=FS50142680
|dn_ref=FS50142680
|dn_date=27/09/2007
|dn_date=27 September 2007
|dn_pa=East Sussex County Council
|dn_pa=East Sussex County Council
|dn_summary=e also found that the Council should have undertaken an internal review of its decision to refuse disclosure as requested by the complainant.
|dn_summary=The complainant asked the Council for a copy of a letter that its Director of Children’s Services had written to a Crown Court judge. The Council withheld the letter under s36 (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs), s40 (personal information) and s41 (information provided in confidence). The Commissioner decided that the requested information was exempt under s40. He also found that the Council should have undertaken an internal review of its decision to refuse disclosure as requested by the complainant.
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2007/fs_50142680.pdf
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2007/fs_50142680.pdf
}}
}}
{{DNDecision
{{DNDecision1
|dnd_section=FOI 40
|dnd_section=FOI 40
|dnd_finding=Upheld
|dnd_finding=Upheld
}}
}}

Revision as of 22:27, 15 May 2010


Decision Summary

  • Case Ref: FS50142680
  • Date: 27 September 2007
  • Public Authority: East Sussex County Council
  • Summary: The complainant asked the Council for a copy of a letter that its Director of Children’s Services had written to a Crown Court judge. The Council withheld the letter under s36 (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs), s40 (personal information) and s41 (information provided in confidence). The Commissioner decided that the requested information was exempt under s40. He also found that the Council should have undertaken an internal review of its decision to refuse disclosure as requested by the complainant.
  • View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]

Template:DNDecision1