FS50074342: Difference between revisions

From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(XML import)
m (Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision")
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{DNSummaryBox
{{DNSummaryBox
|dn_ref=FS50074342
|dn_ref=FS50074342
|dn_date=21/12/2006
|dn_date=21 December 2006
|dn_pa=North Yorkshire Police
|dn_pa=North Yorkshire Police
|dn_summary=t.
|dn_summary=The complainant asked North Yorkshire Police (‘NYP’) for information about the cost to the force of policing/policing protests at RAF Menwith Hill (‘the base’). NYP refused to provide the information, citing the exemptions contained in sections 24(1), 26(1), 27(1), 31, 36(2), and 38(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. However, NYP subsequently withdrew its citation of the exemption in section 24 and instead contended that the exemption in section 23(1) was applicable to most of the information sought. The Commissioner has decided that section 23(1) is engaged and, since it is an absolute exemption, it is not subject to the public interest test, and NYP is entitled to withhold the information in question. While the Commissioner welcomed NYP’s agreement to provide the complainant with some information, he criticised NYP for citing section 23 at such a late stage and found that NYP was in breach of section 17 of the Act.
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2006/fs50074342.pdf
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2006/fs50074342.pdf
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 22:23, 15 May 2010


Decision Summary

  • Case Ref: FS50074342
  • Date: 21 December 2006
  • Public Authority: North Yorkshire Police
  • Summary: The complainant asked North Yorkshire Police (‘NYP’) for information about the cost to the force of policing/policing protests at RAF Menwith Hill (‘the base’). NYP refused to provide the information, citing the exemptions contained in sections 24(1), 26(1), 27(1), 31, 36(2), and 38(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. However, NYP subsequently withdrew its citation of the exemption in section 24 and instead contended that the exemption in section 23(1) was applicable to most of the information sought. The Commissioner has decided that section 23(1) is engaged and, since it is an absolute exemption, it is not subject to the public interest test, and NYP is entitled to withhold the information in question. While the Commissioner welcomed NYP’s agreement to provide the complainant with some information, he criticised NYP for citing section 23 at such a late stage and found that NYP was in breach of section 17 of the Act.
  • View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]