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 >> Police and Crime Commissioner for West Yorkshire (Police and criminal justice ) [2017] UKICO FS50662577 (22 August 2017) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKICO/2017/FS50662577.html Cite as: [2017] UKICO FS50662577 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
22 August 2017, Police and criminal justice
The complainant has requested the report of an investigation conducted by Lancashire Constabulary at the request of the West Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner into certain allegations made against a former Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police; he also requested associated emails. The Information Commissioner decided that the West Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner has applied the section 31(1)(c) FOIA (law enforcement) exemption correctly. In the light of her findings in relation to section 31 FOIA, the Commissioner did not proceed to consider application by the West Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner of other FOIA exemptions cited. The Information Commissioner decided that in delaying a substantive response the West Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner had breached section 10(1) FOIA (time for compliance) and section 17(1) FOIA (refusal of request). She further decided that the West Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner had not breached the section 45(1) FOIA code of practice in carrying out its internal review of the matter. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any further steps to comply with the legislation.
FOI 31: Not upheld FOI 10: Upheld FOI 17: Upheld FOI 45: Not upheld
