Decisions of the Information Commissioner

The Senior Investigator annulled the decision of the Council. He found that it had not justified its decision to refuse to release the relevant part of the record at issue, and directed its release.

The Investigator affirmed the decision of UCD.

The Investigator affirmed the decision of the Defence Forces.

The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the NTMA. While he found that it was justified in refusing some information by virtue of paragraph Schedule 1, Part 1, paragraph w(iii), he found that it was not justified in refusing to release the remaining information in the records falling within the scope of the request and directed its release.

The Investigator affirmed the Department's decision.

The Senior Investigator annulled the decision of the NMH and directed it to process the request afresh.

The Senior Investigator affirmed the Central Bank's decision.

The Investigator affirmed TCD's decisions in both cases.

The Senior Investigator varied the Council's decision. He found that the Council was justified in refusing access to certain records and information on the basis of sections 31(1)(a), 36(1)(b) and 37(1) of the FOI Act. He found that it was not justified in refusing accessing to certain other information on the basis of sections 35(1)(a), 36(1)(a) and 36(1)(b) and he directed the release of same, subject to the removal of annotations from one of the records and the redaction of personal information within.

The Investigator annulled CHI's decision on the basis that it failed to comply with the requirements of section 15(4) of the FOI Act. She directed CHI to carry out a new decision making process on the applicant’s request.