FS50163685: 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=FS50163685 | |dn_ref=FS50163685 | ||
|dn_date=09/11/2009 | |dn_date=09/11/2009 | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{DNDecision | {{DNDecision | ||
| | |dnd_section=FOI 10 | ||
| | |dnd_finding=Upheld | ||
}} | |||
{{DNDecision | |||
|dnd_section=FOI 12 | |||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |||
}} | |||
{{DNDecision | |||
|dnd_section=FOI 17 | |||
|dnd_finding=Upheld | |||
}} | |||
{{DNDecision | |||
|dnd_section=FOI 31 | |||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 22:11, 3 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50163685
- Date: 09/11/2009
- Public Authority: Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
- Summary: The complainant asked the DVLA for information relating to vehicle licensing penalties. The Commissioner found that the DVLA acted correctly in refusing part of the request by virtue of section 31(1)(d) of the Act, and in refusing of the remainder of the request under section 12 of the Act. The Commissioner also found that the DVLA had breached section 1(1)(a) and 17(5) of the Act.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 10 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 12 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 17 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 31 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
