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 varied the Museum's decision and directed the partial release of three of the records (i.e subject to the redaction of personal information). She upheld the refusal of one record in full on the basis that its release could reasonably be expected to have a significant, adverse effect on the performance by the Museum of its functions relating to management, particularly the management of its staff, and thus found it to be exempt under section 21(1)(b) of the FOI Act
Date: 15-09-2014
Case Number: 130034
Public Body: The National Museum of Ireland
Section of the Act.:
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed that the statements issued by the University, together with other information and documents also provided by the University, constitute a satisfactory statement of reasons for the purposes of section 18 of the FOI Act.
Date: 12-09-2014
Case Number: 130198
Public Body: University of Limerick
Section of the Act.: s.18
Summary: The Senior Investigator decided to annul the decision of the Council and directed the Council to conduct a fresh examination and decision making process in respect of the records
Date: 12-09-2014
Case Number: 130095
Public Body: Donegal County Council
Section of the Act.:
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Department to release certain records redacted to remove the applicant's name and address.
Date: 12-09-2014
Case Number: 130175
Public Body: Department of Defence
Section of the Act.: s.28, s.28(1), s.28(2)(b), s.28(5), s.29, s.29(3), s.26, s.27
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decisions of the Board in Cases 130309 and 140091 to reflect that the applicant has no material interest in the acts in question, within the meaning of sections 18(5) and 18(6) of the FOI Act, and affirmed the decision of the Board in Case 140138. This decision relates to three requests by the applicant. These are reference no's: 130309, 140091, 140138
Date: 11-09-2014
Case Number: 140138
Public Body: Legal Aid Board
Section of the Act.: s.18, s.18(5), s.18(6),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decisions of the Board in Cases 130309 and 140091 to reflect that the applicant has no material interest in the acts in question, within the meaning of sections 18(5) and 18(6) of the FOI Act, and affirmed the decision of the Board in Case 140138. This decision relates to three requests by the applicant. These are reference no's: 130309, 140091, 140138
Date: 11-09-2014
Case Number: 140138
Public Body: Legal Aid Board
Section of the Act.: s.18, s.18(5), s.18(6),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decisions of the Board in Cases 130309 and 140091 to reflect that the applicant has no material interest in the acts in question, within the meaning of sections 18(5) and 18(6) of the FOI Act, and affirmed the decision of the Board in Case 140138.
Date: 11-09-2014
Case Number: 130309 and 140091 and 140138
Public Body: Legal Aid Board
Section of the Act.: s.18, s.18(5), s.18(6),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the Department. He found that the Department was justified in its decision to refuse access to the majority of the withheld records on the basis that they are exempt from release under sections 23(1)(b) and 28(1) of the FOI Act but he directed the release of a small amount of previously withheld information.
Date: 10-09-2014
Case Number: 140165
Public Body: Department of Social Protection
Section of the Act.: s.23, s.23(1)(b), s.26, s.26(1)(a), s.28, s.28(1), s.28(2), s.28(5)(a), s.28(5B),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the Agency and directed the release of further parts of the records that had been withheld, he found that the Agency was justified in its decision to refuse access to the remaining parts of the records withheld on the basis of sections 28 and 22(1)(a) of the FOI Act.
Date: 09-09-2014
Case Number: 140116
Public Body: Child and Family Agency
Section of the Act.: s.22, s.22(1)(a), s.28
Summary: The Senior Investigator found that the company failed to meet its burden under section 34(12)(a) of the FOI Act of showing that the decision of the HPRA to grant access to the records 2-6 was not justified. However, she found that records 1 and 7-9 were exempt from release under section 26(1)(b). She varied the decision of the HPRA accordingly
Date: 05-09-2014
Case Number: 130092
Public Body: The Health Products Regulatory Authority
Section of the Act.: s.26, s.26(1)(a), s.26(1)(b), s.27, s.27(1)(b), s.27(1)(c), s.28, s.28(1),