FS50227721: Difference between revisions

From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(CSV import)
 
(XML import)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{DNSummaryBox
{{DNSummaryBox
|dn_ref=FS50227721
|dn_ref=FS50227721
|dn_date=22/03/2010
|dn_date=22/03/2010
|dn_pa=Ministry of Justice
|dn_pa=Ministry of Justice
|dn_summary=The complainant requested information about the Leasehold Reform Act relating to the Isles of Scilly and the Duchy of Cornwall. At the internal review stage, the request having been narrowed, the MoJ told the complainant that it did not hold any relevant information. The Commissioner is satisfied that, at the time of the request, the MoJ did not hold information within the scope of the narrowed request. However, he finds procedural breaches in relation to the MoJ�s handling of the original request.
|dn_summary=The complainant requested information about the Leasehold Reform Act relating to the Isles of Scilly and the Duchy of Cornwall. At the internal review stage, the request having been narrowed, the MoJ told the complainant that it did not hold any relevant information. The Commissioner is satisfied that, at the time of the request, the MoJ did not hold information within the scope of the narrowed request. However, he finds procedural breaches in relation to the MoJ's handling of the original request.
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fs_50227721.pdf
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fs_50227721.pdf
}}
}}
{{DNDecision
{{DNDecision
|1=FOI 17
|dnd_section=FOI 1
|2=Upheld
|dnd_finding=Not upheld
}}
{{DNDecision
|dnd_section=FOI 10
|dnd_finding=Upheld
}}
{{DNDecision
|dnd_section=FOI 17
|dnd_finding=Upheld
}}
}}

Revision as of 19:19, 3 May 2010


Decision Summary

  • Case Ref: FS50227721
  • Date: 22/03/2010
  • Public Authority: Ministry of Justice
  • Summary: The complainant requested information about the Leasehold Reform Act relating to the Isles of Scilly and the Duchy of Cornwall. At the internal review stage, the request having been narrowed, the MoJ told the complainant that it did not hold any relevant information. The Commissioner is satisfied that, at the time of the request, the MoJ did not hold information within the scope of the narrowed request. However, he finds procedural breaches in relation to the MoJ's handling of the original request.
  • View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]