Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the Department?s decision to refuse access to the records sought under section 37(1).
Date: 22-08-2019
Case Number: OIC-53495-S1V9F3 (190226)
Public Body: Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Section of the Act.: s.37, s.37(1),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Department. He found that the Department was not required to consider if relevant records are held by PDST on the ground that such records, if they exist, are not held by or under the control of the Department. He also found that the Department had taken all reasonable steps to ascertain the whereabouts of relevant records.
Date: 21-08-2019
Case Number: OIC-53305-L3H8G0 (190055)
Public Body: Department of Education and Skills
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of AIT. He found that section 15(1)(a) applied to part 2. He found that sections 15(1)(i), 31(1)(a) and 31(1)(b) applied to certain records. In so far as section 15(1)(a) was claimed or implied, he annulled the decision on parts 1, 3, 4 and 5 and directed that AIT undertake a fresh consideration of the request. He directed the release of records to which no exemption was found to apply.
Date: 20-08-2019
Case Number: OIC-53228-Y2L6M3 (180019)
Public Body: Athlone Institute of Technology
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.15(1)(i), s.31, s.31(1)(a), s.31(1)(b),
Summary: The Senior Investigator annulled the decision of the HSE on the ground that it failed to offer assistance to the applicant under section 15(4) of the FOI Act. He directed it to conduct a fresh decision-making process in respect of the applicant?s request.
Date: 20-08-2019
Case Number: OIC-53428-M0G1V7 (190177)
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(b), s.15(1)(c),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Department. She found that it was justified in its decision to refuse access to further records under section 15(1)(a) of the FOI Act, on the basis that they did not exist or cannot be found after reasonable searches. She found that the Department was justified in its decision to refuse access under section 15(1)(d) on the basis that the information in one record is already in the public domain. She found that it was justified in its decision to withhold personal information of third parties under section 37(1). She found that the public interest in granting the request did not outweigh the public interest in upholding the privacy rights of individuals.
Date: 20-08-2019
Case Number: OIC-53439-X6W9G3
Public Body: Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.15(1)(d), s.37,
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Department. She found that it was justified in its decision to refuse access to further records under section 15(1)(a) of the FOI Act, on the basis that they did not exist or cannot be found after reasonable searches. She found that the Department was justified in its decision to refuse access under section 15(1)(d) on the basis that the information in one record is already in the public domain. She found that it was justified in its decision to withhold personal information of third parties under section 37(1). She found that the public interest in granting the request did not outweigh the public interest in upholding the privacy rights of individuals.
Date: 20-08-2019
Case Number: OIC-53439-X6W9G3
Public Body: Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.15(1)(d), s.37, s.37(1),
Summary: The Senior Investigator found that LMETB was justified in its decision to charge a fee of ?175 for the search for and retrieval of relevant records.
Date: 20-08-2019
Case Number: OIC-53443-T7W0X5 (190194)
Public Body: Louth and Meath Education and Training Board
Section of the Act.: s.27
Summary: The Senior Investigator annulled the decision of RTÉ and directed the release of the record in its entirety
Date: 16-08-2019
Case Number: OIC-53241-B3T2F0
Public Body: RTÉ
Section of the Act.: s.30, s.30(1)(b), s.30(1)(c), s.36, s.36(1)(c),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed AGS?s decision. She found that section 15(1)(a) of the FOI Act applies to the applicant?s request insofar as it relates to additional records. She found that certain information withheld is exempt under section 37(1) of the FOI Act as release would involve the disclosure of personal information of individuals other than the applicant and the public interest that the request should be granted does not outweigh the public interest that the right to privacy of those individual(s) should be upheld. Finally, she found that the remainder of the withheld information falls within the exclusion in Schedule 1 Part 1(n) of the Act
Date: 16-08-2019
Case Number: OIC-53291-P5S0S1
Public Body: An Garda Síochána
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.37, s.37(1),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the HSE. She found that sections 30(1)(b) and 37(1) applied to most of the records and that, on balance, the public interest did not favour the release of the majority of them. However, she found that the HSE was not justified under section 37 in withholding access to some of the records sought, and she directed their release. She also found that section 31(1)(a) applied to a number of other records and that the HSE was justified in withholding these. The Senior Investigator found that the HSE was not justified in refusing to grant access to additional records located during the review, on the basis of section 15(1)(a) and directed the HSE to undertake a fresh decision making process in relation to these records.
Date: 14-08-2019
Case Number: OIC-53309-K0Y0D1
Public Body: Health Service Executive (the HSE)
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.30, s.30(1)(b), s.31, s.31(1)(a), s.37, s.37(1),