BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
Information Commissioner's Office |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Information Commissioner's Office >> Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council (Local government (Borough council)) [2016] UKICO FER0616171 (2 August 2016) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKICO/2016/FER0616171.html Cite as: [2016] UKICO FER0616171, [2016] UKICO FER616171 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
2 August 2016, Local government (Borough council)
The complainant has requested the council to disclose the Pre-planning advice it gave to her neighbour in October 2014, any case notes that were taken by the planning officer during their visit to the property and photographs taken. The council released a redacted version of the Pre-planning advice it holds, citing regulation 12(5)(f) of the EIR for the sections it wished to withhold. It confirmed that it does not hold any case notes relating to the officer’s visit but disclosed all photographs taken to the complainant. The Commissioner’s investigation focussed on the redacted version of the Pre-planning advice and although regulation 12(5)(f) of the EIR was applied by the council, the Commissioner considered the withheld information is third party personal data and regulation 13 of the EIR was more appropriate. The Commissioner’s decision is that the remaining withheld information is exempt from disclosure under regulation 13 of the EIR and therefore no further action is required in this case. She has however recorded a breach of regulation 11 of the EIR, as the council failed to carry out an internal review in 40 working days.
EIR 11: Upheld EIR 13: Not upheld
