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 Department. He found that it was justified in refusing access to the relevant records on the basis of section 29 of the FOI Act.
Date: 10-05-2018
Case Number: 170520
Public Body: Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine
Section of the Act.: s.31
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the HSE.
Date: 09-05-2018
Case Number: 180107
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.37
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the HSE. He found that no right of access exists to any such records created before the effective date applicable to the HSE, i.e. 21 October 1998.
Date: 08-05-2018
Case Number: 180085
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.11
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the HSE's refusal to fully grant the request. She found some records to attract legal professional privilege and to be exempt under section 31(1)(a). She found the remaining records to contain joint personal information that is exempt under section 37 of the FOI Act. She further found that the public interest in granting access to those records does not outweigh the public interest in upholding the right to privacy of the third parties. She also found the HSE to have carried out reasonable searches for records covered by the request and that section 15(1)(a) applies to any further records.
Date: 04-05-2018
Case Number: 170493
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.31, s.31(1)(a), s.37, s.37(1), s.12
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the Council's decision. She affirmed its decision to refuse access to certain records relating to private papers, under section 42(k) of the FOI Act and other records containing complaints to the Council, under section 42(m)(i) of the FOI Act, on the basis that the FOI Act does not apply to such records. She annulled its decision on the remaining records and directed their release.
Date: 03-05-2018
Case Number: 170481
Public Body: Waterford City and County Council
Section of the Act.: s.42, s.42(k), s.42(m)(i), s.35
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of AIT to refuse parts of the applicants requests under sections 15(1)(i) and 15(1)(a).
Date: 02-05-2018
Case Number: 180021
Public Body: Athlone Institute of Technology
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.15(1)(i),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of AIT to refuse parts of the applicants requests under sections 15(1)(i) and 15(1)(a).
Date: 02-05-2018
Case Number: 180022
Public Body: Athlone Institute of Technology
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a), s.15(1)(i),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the Revenue's refusal of the request. She found that certain records were exempt under section 29. She found that the Revenue had justified its position that the records related to a deliberative process and that it would be contrary to the public interest for access to be granted to them at this point in time. She also found that the Revenue had justified its refusal of access to the other records within the scope of the request on the basis that they do not exist (section 15(1)(a)).
Date: 30-04-2018
Case Number: 170353
Public Body: Office of the Revenue Commissioners
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator annulled the decision of the Department. She found that the Department had not justified its reliance on sections 29, 30 and 36 to withhold access and she directed the release of the information relating to the charity contained in the records at issue.
Date: 30-04-2018
Case Number: 170372
Public Body: Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Section of the Act.: s.29
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the Department's decision to grant access to the records concerned. She found that section 36(1)(b) applies to the records at issue but that the public interest would, on balance, be better served by the release of the records concerned as redacted by the Department.
Date: 27-04-2018
Case Number: 170572
Public Body: Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Section of the Act.: s.35