Cinntí OIC
Is féidir cinntí a eisíodh ó Eanáir 2022 ar aghaidh a fháil anseo. Má theastaíonn cinneadh níos luaithe uait, déan teagmháil linn ag info@oic.ie
Is féidir cinntí a eisíodh ó Eanáir 2022 ar aghaidh a fháil anseo. Má theastaíonn cinneadh níos luaithe uait, déan teagmháil linn ag info@oic.ie
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Defence Forces. He found that the Defence Forces was not required to provide a more detailed statement as to do so would require the inclusion of information that would be exempt from release under section 33(3) of the Act.
Date: 08-06-2018
Case Number: 180083
Public Body: Defence Forces
Section of the Act.: s.33, s.33(3)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Defence Forces on the ground that they had provided the applicant with an adequate statement of the reasons as to why he was unsuccessful in his application for enlistment.
Date: 07-06-2018
Case Number: 180055
Public Body: Defence Forces
Section of the Act.: s.33, s.33(3)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the HSE's decision. She affirmed its refusal of parts 2, 3 and 4 of the applicant's request, although under section 15(1)(a) of the FOI Act (discrete records containing the information requested do not exist) rather than the exemptions relied on in the HSE's decision. She annulled its refusal of part 1 of the request and directed it to release parts of a record that contain the information sought.
Date: 29-05-2018
Case Number: 170033
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.15,
Summary: The Senior Investigator found that the WRC was justified in its decision to refuse access to the records. She affirmed the WRC's decision to refuse access to the withheld records under section 31(1)(a) of the Act on the basis of legal professional privilege.
Date: 28-05-2018
Case Number: 180066
Public Body: Workplace Relations Commission
Section of the Act.: s.31, s.31(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Council. He found it was justified in refusing access to the information sought under section 42(m)(i).
Date: 25-05-2018
Case Number: 180143
Public Body: Tipperary County Council
Section of the Act.: s.42
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of EirGrid. She affirmed its decision to refuse access to the majority of the records on the basis of section 36(1)(b). She also affirmed its decision to refuse access to records relating to part 5 of the request on the basis of section 15(1)(a). She annulled its decision to refuse access to record 1 and directed EirGrid to release this record, subject to the redaction of third party information. She also annulled its decision in relation to parts of record 16a and directed EirGrid to undertake a fresh decision-making process in relation to the parts of that record 16a it had considered to be outside scope, and to release the final amount of the winning tender
Date: 25-05-2018
Case Number: 170337
Public Body: EirGrid
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.36,
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the Hospital to refuse access to the records under section 37(3) of the Act. She found that section 37(4) is engaged in relation to the offer of access to an appropriate health professional if requested by the applicant.
Date: 16-05-2018
Case Number: 180023
Public Body: Mater Misericordiae Hospital Ltd
Section of the Act.: s.37, s.37(3),
Summary: The Senior Investigator annulled the decisions of the Department and directed it to undertake a fresh decision-making process in respect of each of the applicant's requests.
Date: 14-05-2018
Case Number: 180013
Public Body: Department of Justice and Equality
Section of the Act.: s.15,
Summary: The Senior Investigator annulled the decisions of the Department and directed it to undertake a fresh decision-making process in respect of each of the applicant's requests.
Date: 14-05-2018
Case Number: 180014
Public Body: Department of Justice and Equality
Section of the Act.: s.15,
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the VCI. She annulled its decision that the request for access to records relating to complaints made to the PIC was not a valid request under the FOI Act. She remitted this aspect of the request to the VCI for fresh consideration and the issue of a new decision. She found that the VCI was justified in refusing access to five reports of the FTPC on the basis of section 37(1) of the FOI Act, but she directed partial release of the remaining FTPC report with all personal information redacted.
Date: 14-05-2018
Case Number: 170454
Public Body: Veterinary Council of Ireland
Section of the Act.: s.41,