From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Decision Summary

  • Case Ref: FS50170038
  • Date: 18 December 2008
  • Public Authority: Her Majesty's Courts Service
  • Summary: The complainant requested information about a complaint he made against a member of staff. The public authority informed the complainant that this information was exempt under section 40(2) and section 31(g) [sic]. After examining the requested information the Commissioner has determined that the information was in fact exempt by virtue of section 40(1) as it was all the personal data of the complainant and that in fact the public authority was not obliged to comply with section 1(1)(a) by virtue of section 40(5). He has concluded that the request should have been processed as a request under the Data Protection Act 1998. He will now go on to make a separate assessment under section 42 of that Act. In failing to provide a refusal notice within twenty working days the public authority breached section 17(1). In failing to cite the section 31(1)(g) exemption it chose to rely on accurately it breached section 17(1)(a). The Commissioner has determined that the public authority should have issued a refusal notice stating that it was not required to confirm or deny whether the information requested was held by virtue of section 40(5). This is on the basis that the information would be the complainant’s personal data and exempt under section 40(1). However the Commissioner has not ordered any remedial steps in this case.
  • View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]