Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Department.
Date: 24-05-2016
Case Number: 150403
Public Body: Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources
Section of the Act.: s.35
Summary: The Senior Investigator found that the IPS was not justified in its decision to refuse the request under section 15(1)(c) of the Act. He annulled the decision of the IPS and directed it to undertake a fresh decision making process on the request.
Date: 23-05-2016
Case Number: 160018
Public Body: Irish Prison Service
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(c),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the AG's Office.
Date: 23-05-2016
Case Number: 160055
Public Body: The Office of the Attorney General
Section of the Act.: s.42
Summary: The Commissioner affirmed the EAT's decision to refuse access to the record. He found that section 36(1)(b) of the FOI Act applied.
Date: 20-05-2016
Case Number: 150303
Public Body: Employment Appeals Tribunal
Section of the Act.: s.36, s.36(1)(b),
Summary: The Information Commissioner annulled any decision of the Council in respect of additional records which came to light during the review or any further records that might be held and directed that a fresh decision making process be undertaken. He found that section 36(1)(b) applied to certain parts of the withheld records, and directed the release of the other withheld information for which he found that the Council had not justified its refusal of access.
Date: 20-05-2016
Case Number: 150234
Public Body: South Dublin County Counci
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.36, s.36(1)(b),
Summary: The Senior Investigator upheld the HSE's decision. She found sections 37(1) and 37(7) of the FOI Act to apply to the vast majority of the records, which contain either third party personal information, or third party personal information that is inextricably linked to the personal information of the applicant and/or his daughter (joint personal information). She found that the public interest that the rights of privacy of the third parties to whom the information relates should be upheld outweighs the public interest that the request be granted. She found that, in the particular circumstances of this case, it was not in the best interests of the applicant's child to direct release of those small amounts of remaining information at issue that relate to the child only, or to the applicant and his daughter only.
Date: 18-05-2016
Case Number: 150260
Public Body: The Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.37
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the HSE.
Date: 17-05-2016
Case Number: 160050
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Hospice.
Date: 17-05-2016
Case Number: 160007
Public Body: Our Lady's Hospice, Harold's Cross
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Department.
Date: 16-05-2016
Case Number: 160020
Public Body: Department of Justice and Equality
Section of the Act.: s.15
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Council.
Date: 13-05-2016
Case Number: 160105
Public Body: Cork City Council
Section of the Act.: