OIC Decisions
Decisions issued from January 2022 onwards can be found here. Earlier decisions will be uploaded in the coming months. If you require an earlier decision then please email us at info@oic.ie
Decisions issued from January 2022 onwards can be found here. Earlier decisions will be uploaded in the coming months. If you require an earlier decision then please email us at info@oic.ie
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Defence Forces to refuse to amend the record.
Date: 17-05-2021
Case Number: OIC-105064-M1P0W3
Public Body: Defence Forces
Section of the Act.: s.9
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the CPSA.
Date: 13-05-2021
Case Number: OIC-101850-H6P9L4
Public Body: Commission for Public Service Appointments
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the Defence Force's decision.
Date: 12-05-2021
Case Number: OIC-103669-Y0D4Y1
Public Body: Defence Forces
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the Department's decision.
Date: 12-05-2021
Case Number: OIC-106078-R3K0Z3
Public Body: Department of Justice
Section of the Act.: s.14
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the IPS. He directed the release of one record relating to the applicant's information as contained on the key vending system, if it remains in existence, and the release of two emails that the IPS had withheld under section 30(1)(b).
Date: 12-05-2021
Case Number: OIC-92646-Q8V1N8
Public Body: Irish Prison Service
Section of the Act.: s.30, s.30(1)(b), s.36, s.36(1)(b), s.37, s.37(1), s.15
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the Department. He affirmed the decision with regard to ten parts of the applicant's request and annulled it with regard to one part for records relating to his employment, directing the Department to undertake a fresh decision making process in respect of that part.
Date: 12-05-2021
Case Number: Mr X and Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine
Public Body: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the Department. He affirmed the decision with regard to ten parts of the applicant's request and annulled it with regard to one part for records relating to his employment, directing the Department to undertake a fresh decision making process in respect of that part.
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the Department's decision, under sections 15(1)(d), 33(1)(d), 33(2)(b)(i), 33(2)(b)(ii) and 37(1) of the FOI Act
Date: 12-05-2021
Case Number: OIC-98118-R3D4Y0
Public Body: X and Department of Foreign Affairs
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(d), s.33, s.33(1)(d), s.33(2)(b)(i), s.33(2)(b)(ii), s.37, s.37(1),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the Council. He directed the release of the email chain at issue, subject to the redaction of certain third party personal information under section 37(1) of the Act.
Date: 10-05-2021
Case Number: OIC-98790-Y4Y8C9
Public Body: Kildare County Council
Section of the Act.: s.32, s.32(1)(a)(i), s.35, s.35(1)(a), s.35(2), s.37, s.37(1),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the Department's decision to refuse to grant access to the financial terms of the contract on the basis of section 30(1)(c), as it would disclose positions taken by it for the purpose of negotiations carried on or to be carried on. She found that the public interest, on balance, did not favour the release of the information concerned.
Date: 07-05-2021
Case Number: OIC-95505-R0R2Q2
Public Body: Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth
Section of the Act.: s.30, s.30(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the Authority. She annulled its decision to refuse access to record 18 on the basis of section 29 of the FOI Act, as she found that the Authority had not adequately demonstrated how release would be contrary to the public interest. She affirmed its decision to withhold access to records 10-12 under section 37(1) on the basis that they contained personal information and she found that the public interest, on balance, did not favour their release. She also affirmed its effective decision to refuse access to additional records concerning the applicantÂ’s complaints under section 15(1)(a), on the basis that they did not exist.
Date: 06-05-2021
Case Number: OIC-101883-N3Y1L7
Public Body: Property Services Regulatory Authority
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1), s.29, s.29(1), s.37, s.37(1),