FS50148118: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) (CSV import) |
Alex skene (talk | contribs) (XML import) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DNSummaryBox | {{DNSummaryBox | ||
|dn_ref=FS50148118 | |dn_ref=FS50148118 | ||
|dn_date=27/10/2009 | |dn_date=27/10/2009 | ||
|dn_pa=Bedfordshire Police | |dn_pa=Bedfordshire Police | ||
|dn_summary= | |dn_summary=’s investigation, Bedfordshire Police confirmed that it was only relying on the exemptions in sections 40(2), 32 and 38. The Commissioner has investigated and found that the whole file is exempt by virtue of section 40(2). Accordingly, he requires no steps to be taken. | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2009/fs_50148118.pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2009/fs_50148118.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{DNDecision | {{DNDecision | ||
| | |dnd_section=FOI 40 | ||
| | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} |
Revision as of 22:09, 3 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50148118
- Date: 27/10/2009
- Public Authority: Bedfordshire Police
- Summary: ’s investigation, Bedfordshire Police confirmed that it was only relying on the exemptions in sections 40(2), 32 and 38. The Commissioner has investigated and found that the whole file is exempt by virtue of section 40(2). Accordingly, he requires no steps to be taken.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 40 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions