FS50082765: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) CSV import |
Alex skene (talk | contribs) m Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision" |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2007/decision_notice_fs50082765.pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2007/decision_notice_fs50082765.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 44 | |dnd_section=FOI 44 | ||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 23:24, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50082765
- Date: 5 February 2007
- Public Authority: East Sussex County Council
- Summary: The complainant requested information from the public authority about its dealings with a named company. The public authority refused to disclose relying upon section 44 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. As this is an absolute exemption the public authority did not have to consider the public interest. The Commissioner has considered the exempt information in question and is satisfied that the public authority has applied section 44 correctly.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 44 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
