Decisions of the Information Commissioner

The Senior Investigator varied the decision of CORU. He found that it was not justified in its decision to grant access, under section 36(3) of the Act, to a letter it had issued to the applicant with observations on a submission made and that it was not justified in its decision to grant access to certain parts of a second related record. He found those parts of the second record to be exempt under sections 36(1)(b) and 37(1) of the Act.

The Investigator affirmed Tusla's decision.

The Investigator affirmed the decision of the HSE

The Investigator affirmed the Central Bank's decision. She found that it was justified, pursuant to Schedule 1, Part 1(b)(i) and section 42(i) of the FOI Act, in refusing access to the records sought on the grounds that the FOI Act does not apply to them.

The Senior Investigator affirmed the HPRA's decision. He found that it was justified in its decision to grant access to specific information in the record which the applicant argued to be exempt from release under sections 35(1)(a), 36(1)(b) and 36(1)(c) of the FOI Act.

The Investigator annulled the Department's decision and directed it to consider the request afresh.

The Investigator varied the decision of the HSE

The Investigator affirmed the IPS's decision.

The Senior Investigator annulled the decision of ÚnaG and directed the release of the withheld information.

The Investigator varied the decision of the Council