FS50088042: 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=FS50088042 | |dn_ref=FS50088042 | ||
|dn_date=13 | |dn_date=13 July 2006 | ||
|dn_pa=Crown Prosecution Service | |dn_pa=Crown Prosecution Service | ||
|dn_summary=The complainant requested information relating to an allegation of a criminal offence made by him some years previously. The Commissioner's decision was that, by informing the complainant that the information requested was not held by it because it was never created, the public authority complied with the requirements of the Act. Although the Commissioner additionally found that the public authority wrongly claimed that the request was repeated this did not lead to a contravention of the Act since a proper response was given to the request. | |dn_summary=The complainant requested information relating to an allegation of a criminal offence made by him some years previously. The Commissioner's decision was that, by informing the complainant that the information requested was not held by it because it was never created, the public authority complied with the requirements of the Act. Although the Commissioner additionally found that the public authority wrongly claimed that the request was repeated this did not lead to a contravention of the Act since a proper response was given to the request. | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/ | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/tools_and_resources/decision_notices.aspx?id=%7B3C6E7B27-2B80-46BD-97ED-EC1B65CDB691%7D&ref=&authority=0§ion=0&month=0&year=2&status=0 | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision1 | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 1 | |dnd_section=FOI 1 | ||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 22:23, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50088042
- Date: 13 July 2006
- Public Authority: Crown Prosecution Service
- Summary: The complainant requested information relating to an allegation of a criminal offence made by him some years previously. The Commissioner's decision was that, by informing the complainant that the information requested was not held by it because it was never created, the public authority complied with the requirements of the Act. Although the Commissioner additionally found that the public authority wrongly claimed that the request was repeated this did not lead to a contravention of the Act since a proper response was given to the request.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
