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.
Date: 29-09-2017
Case Number: 170110
Public Body: Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government
Section of the Act.: s.2, s.2(5), s.15, s.15(1)(d), s.37, s.37(1), s.29
Summary: The Senior Investigator found that the IPS was justified in its decision to refuse access to records under section 15(1)(a) of the FOI Act, on the basis that they did not exist. She affirmed the decision of the IPS.
Date: 29-09-2017
Case Number: 170325
Public Body: Irish Prison Service
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed NAMA's decision, under section 15(1)(a) of the FOI Act
Date: 28-09-2017
Case Number: 170316
Public Body: National Asset Management Agency
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: None
Date: 28-09-2017
Case Number: 170258
Public Body: Department of the Taoiseach
Section of the Act.: s.22,
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the Board’s decision. She found that section 31(1)(b) applied to certain records relating to Court proceedings subject to the in camera rule. She found that the remainder of the withheld records were exempt under section 37(1) of the FOI Act as release of the records would involve the disclosure of personal information of individual(s) other than the applicant and the public interest that the request should be granted does not outweigh the public interest that the right to privacy of those individual(s) should be upheld.
Date: 27-09-2017
Case Number: 170059
Public Body: Legal Aid Board
Section of the Act.: s.22,
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the HSE's refusal to fully grant the request. She found that the applicant was not entitled to access to records concerning his minor son under the provisions of S.I. No. 218 of 2016 (i.e. the Regulations made under section 37(8) of the FOI Act). She found these and all other withheld records to contain personal information that was exempt under section 37 of the FOI Act. She further found that the public interest in granting the request does not outweigh the public interest in upholding the right to privacy of the various third parties.
Date: 27-09-2017
Case Number: 170286
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.37, s.37(1), s.37(2), s.37(5), s.37(8),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed NAMA's decision to refuse to grant access to some of the records in full and to others in part, on the basis that they concern "purchasers or potential purchasers of any asset or loan or of any other asset securing loans held or managed by NAMA". She found that these records/parts of records fall within Schedule 1, Part 1(x)(iii) of the FOI Act, so that the Act does not apply to them. She found that the other records/parts of records are not covered by Schedule 1, Part 1(x)(iii). However, she considered these to contain confidential information concerning a debtor of NAMA, the release of which is prohibited by section 99 of the NAMA Act 2009. She found that section 41(1)(a) of the FOI Act applied to such records, which provides for the refusal of a record where its disclosure is prohibited by an enactment.
Date: 27-09-2017
Case Number: 170288
Public Body: National Asset Management Agency
Section of the Act.: s.41, s.41(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the Department's decision to refuse to confirm whether the requested records exist. She found that the records, if they existed, would constitute third party personal information within the meaning of the FOI Act and that the disclosure of the existence or non-existence of such records would also disclose such personal information. She found the public interest in granting the request (and in turn confirming the existence or otherwise of relevant records) would not, on balance, outweigh the public interest in upholding the third party's right to privacy.
Date: 27-09-2017
Case Number: 170299
Public Body: Department of Social Protection
Section of the Act.: s.37, s.37(1), s.37(2), s.37(5), s.37(6),
Summary: The Senior Investigator found that the HSE was justified in deciding to refuse access to the record sought on the ground that it cannot be found. He affirmed the decision of the HSE.
Date: 21-09-2017
Case Number: 170329
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the HSA. She found that it was justified in refusing to grant access to further information on the basis of section 37 of the FOI Act. She also found that the public interest in granting the request did not outweigh the public interest in protecting the privacy of individuals other than the requester.
Date: 19-09-2017
Case Number: 170300
Public Body: Health and Safety Authority
Section of the Act.: s.37, s.37(1), s.37(2), s.37(5), s.42, s.42(m)(i), s.30, s.32, s.35