FS50074331: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 23:23, 15 May 2010

Case Ref: FS50074331
Date: 3 September 2007
Public Authority: HM Revenue and Customs
Summary: The complainant requested correspondence with three tobacco firms which led to the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with HMRC. HMRC refused to disclose this information under section 44 of the Act. The Commissioner investigated the application of section 44 and found that the exemption had been applied correctly. The Commissioner also found that HMCE did not respond to the complainant’s request in compliance with sections 17 (1) and 17 (3) of the Act. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]

Section of Act / Finding: FOI 17 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions

Section of Act / Finding: FOI 44 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-	{{DNSummaryBox
+{{DNSummaryBox
 |dn_ref=FS50074331
-|dn_date=03/09/2007
+|dn_date=3 September 2007
 |dn_pa=HM Revenue and Customs
-|dn_summary=’s request in compliance with sections 17 (1) and 17 (3) of the Act. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
+|dn_summary=The complainant requested correspondence with three tobacco firms which led to the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with HMRC. HMRC refused to disclose this information under section 44 of the Act. The Commissioner investigated the application of section 44 and found that the exemption had been applied correctly. The Commissioner also found that HMCE did not respond to the complainant’s request in compliance with sections 17 (1) and 17 (3) of the Act. The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
 |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2007/fs50074331.pdf
 }}