FS50147508: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) (XML import) |
Alex skene (talk | contribs) (CSV import) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DNSummaryBox | |||
|dn_ref=FS50147508 | |dn_ref=FS50147508 | ||
|dn_date=30 | |dn_date=30 November 2009 | ||
|dn_pa=National Offender Management Service | |dn_pa=National Offender Management Service | ||
|dn_summary= | |dn_summary=The Complainant requested from the Ministry of Justice (“MOJ”) information it had considered or generated during an industrial dispute with employees of the Prison Service. The MOJ communicated the majority of the requested information to the complainant however the rest was withheld under the exemption in section 36(2)(b)(i) - provision of free and frank advice - and the public interest favoured maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner found that the exemption had been properly applied, as had the public interest test. The Commissioner also decided that the public authority had failed to comply with its duty to issue an adequate refusal notice within the time limit set out in section 10(1) of the Act, which constitutes a breach of section 17(1). This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal. | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2009/fs_50147508 | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2009/fs_50147508 .pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision1 | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 10 | |dnd_section=FOI 10 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision2 | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 17 | |dnd_section=FOI 17 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision3 | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 36 | |dnd_section=FOI 36 | ||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 22:27, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50147508
- Date: 30 November 2009
- Public Authority: National Offender Management Service
- Summary: The Complainant requested from the Ministry of Justice (“MOJ”) information it had considered or generated during an industrial dispute with employees of the Prison Service. The MOJ communicated the majority of the requested information to the complainant however the rest was withheld under the exemption in section 36(2)(b)(i) - provision of free and frank advice - and the public interest favoured maintaining the exemption. The Commissioner found that the exemption had been properly applied, as had the public interest test. The Commissioner also decided that the public authority had failed to comply with its duty to issue an adequate refusal notice within the time limit set out in section 10(1) of the Act, which constitutes a breach of section 17(1). This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: .pdf
Template:DNDecision1 Template:DNDecision2 Template:DNDecision3
