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 found that GNI was justified in its decision to refuse access to the records sought by the applicant under section 15(1)(a) of the FOI Act. She affirmed the decision of GNI.
Date: 19-07-2016
Case Number: 160132
Public Body: Gas Networks Ireland
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator upheld the HSE's decision. She found that the HSE had justified its decision to refuse to grant the application under section 9 of the FOI Act.
Date: 19-07-2016
Case Number: 160123
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.9
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed UCC's decision to refuse access to the records sought.
Date: 13-07-2016
Case Number: 160136
Public Body: University College Cork
Section of the Act.: s.37
Summary: The Commissioner annulled the decision of the Department on the basis that it had not satisfied him that its decision was justified having regard to the requirements of section 35(1)(a). He directed the release of the record.
Date: 13-07-2016
Case Number: 150284
Public Body: Department of Justice and Equality
Section of the Act.: s.35
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the Department. He found that parts of records 2, 3, 4 and 12 were exempt from release under section 36(1)(b), and that parts of records 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 15 were exempt from release under section 37(1), and he directed that the relevant material be redacted from the records. He upheld the remainder of the Department's decision.
Date: 13-07-2016
Case Number: 150345
Public Body: Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport
Section of the Act.: s.35, s.36, s.37, s.38
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the Department. He found that parts of records 13 and 17 were exempt from release under sections 36(1)(b) and 37(1).
Date: 13-07-2016
Case Number: 150333
Public Body: Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport
Section of the Act.: s.35, s.36, s.37, s.38
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the Department. He found that parts of records 2, 3, 4 and 12 were exempt from release under section 36(1)(b), and that parts of records 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 15 were exempt from release under section 37(1), and he directed that the relevant material be redacted from the records. He upheld the remainder of the Department’s decision.
Date: 13-07-2016
Case Number: 150344 and 150345
Public Body: Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport
Section of the Act.: s.36, s.36(1)(b), s.37, s.37(1),
Summary: The Senior Investigator found that the section 38 requirements were not applied correctly in this case and annulled the decision of Tusla.
Date: 06-07-2016
Case Number: 160225
Public Body: TUSLA: Child and Family Agency
Section of the Act.: s.22, s.22(2), s.38,
Summary: The Senior Investigator found that the Department was justified its decision to refuse access to the information sought by the applicant under section 15(1)(a) of the FOI Act. He affirmed the decision of the Department.
Date: 01-07-2016
Case Number: 160108
Public Body: Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the PAS' decision. She affirmed its decision under section 37 in respect of parts of the withheld records on the basis that they contained third party personal information about persons other than the applicant. She found that the public interest that the rights of privacy of the third parties concerned should be upheld outweighs the public interest that the request be granted. She affirmed its effective decision under section 15(1)(a) to refuse access to any further records within the scope of the FOI request of 22 August 2015 that the applicant contends might exist. She annulled the PAS' general application of section 31(1)(a) to the records for which legal professional privilege is claimed. She directed it to conduct a fresh decision making process in relation to the records concerned.
Date: 01-07-2016
Case Number: 150442
Public Body: Public Appointments Service
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.37