Decisions of the Information Commissioner

The Senior Investigator annulled TCD’s decision on the ground that it had failed to treat the application as an application for a statement of reasons under section 10. He directed TCD to carry out a fresh decision making process on the application in accordance with the provision of the FOI Act.

The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the HSE.

The Snior Investigator annulled the Defence Force’s decision and he directed it to conduct a fresh decision-making process on the request.

The Senior Investigator varied the Department’s decision. Insofar as hard-copy records were concerned, she found that two records were not covered by the request. She found that records created by the Attorney General (AG) and/or the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) and/or the Chief State Solicitor and/or the Chief State Solicitor’s Office (CSSO) and records given to a Minister for Oireachtas proceedings were not subject to FOI further to the provisions of section 42(f) and 42(j). She found that sections 31(1)(a) (legal professional privilege) and 31(1)(c)(ii)(II) (consultations considered by a committee) applied to some records. She found that section 31(2)(b) (business of an inquiry) applied to certain records but not to a small number of records concerning the inquiry’s administration (section 31(3)). She found that section 37(1) (personal information) applied to certain records and that the public interest did not weigh in favour of their release. She found that sections 29(1) (deliberative process), 30(1)(a) (investigations by an FOI body) and 31(1)(c)(ii)(I) (opinions considered for proceedings in either House of the Oireachtas) did not apply. She directed the release of the remaining hard-copy records. She annulled the Department’s effective decision to withhold certain electronic records covered by the request and its presumed general reliance on section 15(1)(a) (reasonable searches) in relation to both hard copy and electronic records. She directed the Department to make fresh decisions on these matters.

The Senior Investigator affirmed TUSLA’s decision

The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Council.

The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Defence Forces that it is not required, by virtue of section 10(2)(a), to provide a more detailed statement of reasons as to why the applicant was unsuccessful in his application for recruitment to the Defence Forces.

The Senior Investigator annulled the Board’s decision to refuse access to the records sought and directed their release in full.

The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Defence Forces.

The Senior Investigator annulled the Council’s decision on the request and directed it to release the record.