Decision
Mr X and Housing Agency
From Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC)
Case number: OIC-161330-P6M2R5
Published on
From Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC)
Case number: OIC-161330-P6M2R5
Published on
Whether the Housing Agency was justified in refusing the applicant’s request for records relating to his grant application under section 15(1)(i) of the FOI Act on the ground that the records sought were previously released to him.
16 October 2025
This review has its background in a previous FOI request the applicant made to the Housing Agency in 2024, on foot of which the Agency released a number of records with certain information redacted. The applicant sought an internal review of the Housing Agency’s decision in that case and subsequently appealed its decision to this Office in June 2025. This Office did not accept that application as it was outside the six-month timeframe set out in the Act for making an application to this Office. We advised the applicant that he may submit a new request to the Housing Agency, which he duly did.
On 13 June 2025, the applicant made a four-part request to the Housing Agency, for:
1. All records from 1 January 2022 to 31 May 2024 in relation to his application to the Defective Concrete Blocks Scheme and Enhanced Defective Concrete Blocks Scheme and in relation to his address, which were used by the Housing Agency to complete its assessment in respect of his application.
2. All internal/external records and correspondence between Donegal County Council and the appointed officers which allowed the Housing Agency to complete its assessment of his application.
3. All records kept by the Housing Agency and appointed officer when reviewing his application.
4. All records reviewed by the Housing Agency and appointed officer when considering the application for Remediation Option Grant and making the determination.
On 27 June 2025, the Housing Agency refused the applicant’s request under section 15(1)(i) of the FOI Act on the ground that the records sought relate to records already released to the applicant under a previous FOI request made in 2024. On 7 July 2025, the applicant requested an internal review as he was not satisfied with the decisions made by the Housing Agency in relation to his previous request or his FOI request that is the subject of this review. On 25 July 2025, the Housing Agency affirmed its original decision, stating that it was satisfied that the scope of the applicant’s current FOI request remained unchanged from his 2024 FOI request. On 11 August 2025, the applicant applied to this Office for a review of the Housing Agency’s decision, maintaining that the guidelines used in the Housing Agency’s 2024 decision to redact and grant partial release of records is inherently flawed.
I have now completed my review in accordance with section 22(2) of the FOI Act. In carrying out my review, I have had regard to the correspondence outlined above and to the submissions made by the Housing Agency. I have decided to conclude this review by way of a formal, binding decision.
This review is solely concerned with whether the Housing Agency was justified in refusing the applicant’s request dated 13 June 2025 under section 15(1)(i) of the FOI Act on the ground that the records sought were previously released to the applicant in 2024.
Section 15(1)(i) of the FOI Act provides for the discretionary refusal of a request where the request relates to records already released, either to the same or a previous requester and where the records are available to the requester concerned. For the section to apply, the FOI body should be in a position to show that (i) the records sought were already released and (ii) they are available to the requester.
As part of its submissions in this case, the Housing Agency provided the records that were released to the applicant in response to his 2024 request. The Housing Agency also provided a schedule of records for the previous request as well as the original and internal review request and decision letters.
In its submissions, the Housing Agency stated that it had applied section 15(1)(i) as it was satisfied that, thanks to the partial release under the previous FOI request, the applicant was in possession of all the records that were releasable to him under the FOI Act. The Housing Agency confirmed that some of the records which were released previously to the applicant were not released to him in full. It said that the information refused in its decision on the applicant’s previous request is personal information of third parties that was refused under section 37 of the FOI Act.
The purpose of section 15(1)(i) is to negate the need for public bodies to provide additional copies of records that have already been released and are available to the requester. As noted above, while the applicant had applied to this Office for a review of the Housing Agency’s 2024 decision, he did so outside of the six-month timeframe for making an application to this Office. As such, the Housing Agency’s decision on the applicant’s previous request has not been the subject of review by this Office. The matter before this Office in this review solely concerns the Housing Agency’s refusal of the applicant’s more recent request under section 15(1)(i).
It seems to me that the Housing Agency cannot rely on section 15(1)(i) to refuse access to those records, or parts thereof, that were not released to the applicant in full in its decision on his earlier request, as the withheld parts of those records cannot be said to be available to him. Accordingly, I find that the Housing Agency was not justified in refusing the applicant’s request in its entirety under section 15(1)(i), in circumstances where some of the records previously released were not released in full.
However, I do not consider it appropriate to simply direct the release of the records, given the Housing Agency’s original reasons for withholding certain parts of the records. Instead, I find that the most appropriate course of action is to annul the Housing Agency’s decision on the applicant’s request dated 13 June 2025 and to direct it to conduct a new decision-making process in respect of any relevant records that had not previously been released in full to the applicant. The normal rights of internal review and appeal to this Office will apply to the new decision.
Having carried out a review under section 22(2) of the FOI Act, I hereby annul the Housing Agency’s decision to refuse the applicant’s request under section 15(1)(i) of the Act and I direct it to consider the applicant’s request afresh.
Section 24 of the FOI Act sets out detailed provisions for an appeal to the High Court by a party to a review, or any other person affected by the decision. In summary, such an appeal, normally on a point of law, must be initiated not later than four weeks after notice of the decision was given to the person bringing the appeal.
Richard Crowley
Investigator