Decisions of the Information Commissioner

The Commissioner affirmed the decision of the AG's Office.

The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the Department. She found that it had not demonstrated how section 42(h) applied to the majority of the information in the records sought and she directed their release. She directed that such release be subject to the redaction of certain details, which she found to fall outside of FOI by reason of section 42(h) of the FOI Act. She also directed the Department to carry out a fresh decision making process on additional records identified during the review and falling within the scope of the request.

The Senior Investigator affirmed the Department's refusal to grant the request under 37(1) (personal information of third parties) of the FOI Act. In her consideration of the public interest at section 37(5) she found that the public interest in granting the request does not outweigh the public interest in upholding the right to privacy of the third parties.

The Senior Investigator affirmed EI's refusal to grant access to the records under section 37(1) (personal information of identifiable individuals) of the FOI Act. She found that the public interest in granting access to the records does not outweigh the public interest in upholding the right to privacy of the third parties. She was not satisfied that EI has taken all reasonable steps to look for records covered by the request or that further records do not exist (section 15(1)(a)). Therefore, she annulled EI's refusal of that part of the request and directed it to make a fresh decision on any further records within the scope of the request.

The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Department to refuse access to the records sought under section 15(1)(a) of the FOI Act.

The Senior Investigator affirmed TUSLA's decision to refuse access to the records sought under section 15(1)(a) on the ground that they do not exist.

The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the HSE.

The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the HSE. He found it was justified in redacting the information at issue under section 37 of the FOI Act, having considered the provisions of section 37(8) and the regulations made under that subsection.

The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Department. She found that section 37(1) of the FOI Act applied to the records, since the withheld information contains the personal information of individuals other than the applicant. She found that the public interest in granting the request did not outweigh the public interest in upholding the privacy rights of those individuals.

The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the HSE.