FS50193290: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) (CSV import) |
Alex skene (talk | contribs) (XML import) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DNSummaryBox | {{DNSummaryBox | ||
|dn_ref=FS50193290 | |dn_ref=FS50193290 | ||
|dn_date=10/11/2009 | |dn_date=10/11/2009 | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{DNDecision | {{DNDecision | ||
| | |dnd_section=FOI 41 | ||
| | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 22:22, 3 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50193290
- Date: 10/11/2009
- Public Authority: Home Office
- Summary: The complainant requested a copy of the test report which relates to a specific type of speed camera which was compiled as part of the Type Approval process. The Home Office claimed that the report was exempt from disclosure on the basis that it was provided in confidence (section 41) and that disclosure would be likely to prejudice commercial interests (section 43). The Commissioner has determined that the Home Office was correct to cite section 41 and orders no steps to be taken.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 41 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
