Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the HSE. The Senior Investigator found that section 36 (commercially sensitive information) applied to the records concerned, but that the public interest favoured the release of some of the information. She directed the release of some of the information in the records at issue. She also found that section 35 did not apply to the records concerne
Date: 21-12-2018
Case Number: 180253
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.35, s.35(1), s.36, s.36(1)(b),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the NTMA's decision. He found that it was justified in refusing access to a number of the records under section 31(1)(a) and in refusing access to additional relevant records on the ground that no further relevant records apart from those already identified exist or can be found. He found that one record had been inappropriately withheld and he directed its release.
Date: 21-12-2018
Case Number: 180310
Public Body: National Treasury Management Agency
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.31, s.31(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the ORNL.
Date: 19-12-2018
Case Number: 180191
Public Body: Office of the Regulator of the National Lottery
Section of the Act.: s.35, s.35(1), s.36, s.36(1), s.38
Summary: The Senior Investigator annulled the decision of the HSE and directed the release of the information sought
Date: 19-12-2018
Case Number: 180231
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.29, s.30
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the HSE.
Date: 19-12-2018
Case Number: 180442
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.37, s.37(8),
Summary: The Senior Investigator found that the section 38 requirements were not applied correctly in this case and annulled the decision of the National Transport Authority.
Date: 19-12-2018
Case Number: 180519
Public Body: National Transport Authority
Section of the Act.: s.36
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the Department. She found that the request for legal advice was exempt from release under section 31(1)(a) of the FOI Act, but found that the attachments to this request were not exempt and directed their release subject to redaction of personal information of a third party under section 37(1).
Date: 19-12-2018
Case Number: 180375
Public Body: Department of Education and Skills
Section of the Act.: s.29, s.31, s.37
Summary: Whether the Department was justified under section 15(1)(a) of the FOI Act in refusing access to a record relating to the role of an Appeals Board
Date: 19-12-2018
Case Number: 180376
Public Body: Department of Education and Skills
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed TUSLA's decision under sections 15 and 37 of the FOI Act. She found that, having taken reasonable steps to search for any further records, TUSLA's decision was justified on the ground that no further records can be found. She further found that records withheld were exempt as their release would disclose personal information of individuals other than the requesters.
Date: 18-12-2018
Case Number: 180283
Public Body: TUSLA
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.37, s.37(1), s.37(7),
Summary: The Senior Investigator found that the decision to refuse access to the redacted parts of the record was justified on the basis of section 36(1)(c) of the FOI Act.
Date: 17-12-2018
Case Number: 180213
Public Body: Kilkenny County Council
Section of the Act.: s.36