FS50163364: 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=FS50163364 | |dn_ref=FS50163364 | ||
|dn_date=21 | |dn_date=21 October 2008 | ||
|dn_pa=Imperial College London | |dn_pa=Imperial College London | ||
|dn_summary= | |dn_summary=The complainant requested a copy of a document which was used as an informal guide by some of the public authority’s staff to assist with decisions related to the recognition of overseas qualifications when recruiting students The public authority refused to disclose the document on the basis of the exemption contained in section 43(2) (prejudice to commercial interests) of the Act. The Commissioner determined that section 43(2) was not applicable and ordered that the withheld information be disclosed to the complainant. He also found the public authority in breach of sections 1(1)(b) and 10(1). | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2008/fs_50163364.pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2008/fs_50163364.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision1 | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 43 | |dnd_section=FOI 43 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision2 | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 10 | |dnd_section=FOI 10 | ||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 22:29, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50163364
- Date: 21 October 2008
- Public Authority: Imperial College London
- Summary: The complainant requested a copy of a document which was used as an informal guide by some of the public authority’s staff to assist with decisions related to the recognition of overseas qualifications when recruiting students The public authority refused to disclose the document on the basis of the exemption contained in section 43(2) (prejudice to commercial interests) of the Act. The Commissioner determined that section 43(2) was not applicable and ordered that the withheld information be disclosed to the complainant. He also found the public authority in breach of sections 1(1)(b) and 10(1).
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
