FS50172096: 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") |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DNSummaryBox | {{DNSummaryBox | ||
|dn_ref=FS50172096 | |dn_ref=FS50172096 | ||
|dn_date=11 | |dn_date=11 March 2008 | ||
|dn_pa=Driving Standards Agency | |dn_pa=Driving Standards Agency | ||
|dn_summary=The complainant made a request for information on the discussions about two specific rules relating to cyclists in the Highway Code. The public authority withheld the information requested by virtue of the exemption contained in section 35(1)(a). During the course of the investigation the public authority further relied on the exemption contained in section 42 in respect of one of the documents containing the information requested. On considering the case the Commissioner is satisfied that both exemptions are engaged and the public interest favours maintaining both exemptions. | |dn_summary=The complainant made a request for information on the discussions about two specific rules relating to cyclists in the Highway Code. The public authority withheld the information requested by virtue of the exemption contained in section 35(1)(a). During the course of the investigation the public authority further relied on the exemption contained in section 42 in respect of one of the documents containing the information requested. On considering the case the Commissioner is satisfied that both exemptions are engaged and the public interest favours maintaining both exemptions. | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{DNDecision | {{DNDecision | ||
| | |dnd_section=FOI 35 | ||
| | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | |||
{{DNDecision | |||
|dnd_section=FOI 42 | |||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 23:36, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50172096
- Date: 11 March 2008
- Public Authority: Driving Standards Agency
- Summary: The complainant made a request for information on the discussions about two specific rules relating to cyclists in the Highway Code. The public authority withheld the information requested by virtue of the exemption contained in section 35(1)(a). During the course of the investigation the public authority further relied on the exemption contained in section 42 in respect of one of the documents containing the information requested. On considering the case the Commissioner is satisfied that both exemptions are engaged and the public interest favours maintaining both exemptions.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 35 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 42 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
