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 Investigator affirmed the decision of the DPP
Date: 27-08-2024
Case Number: OIC-148891-F8X8P8
Public Body: Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions
Section of the Act.: s.42, s.42(f),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the HSE’s decision.
Date: 26-08-2024
Case Number: OIC-146306-G2V6L3
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(c),
Summary: The Investigator varied the Department’s decision. While she found that the Department was justified, under sections 42(f) and 42(j), in refusing access to the majority part of the records at issue, she found that it had not justified its refusal of specified covering emails and directed their release, subject to the redaction of personal information of third parties.
Date: 22-08-2024
Case Number: OIC-144271-Q6S5R3
Public Body: Department of Justice
Section of the Act.: s.42, s.42(f), s.42(j),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the Commission’s decision. He found it was not justified in refusing access to a record under section 28(1)(c) of the Act. He annulled that part of the Commission’s decision and directed the Commission to consider the request for the record in question afresh. He found that it was not justified in withholding any of the records at issue under section 29(1) or 30(1)(c). He found that it was justified in withholding certain records, in whole or in part, under section 31(1)(a).
Date: 22-08-2024
Case Number: OIC-131914-H5K3T5
Public Body: Standards in Public Office Commission
Section of the Act.: s.28, s.28(1)(c), s.29, s.29(1), s.30, s.30(1)(c), s.31, s.31(1)(a),
Summary: The Investigator affirmed the NCCA’s decision.
Date: 20-08-2024
Case Number: OIC-148013-G8P7T7
Public Body: National Council for Curriculum and Assessment
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(c),
Summary: The Senior Investigator varied the decision of the HSE. While he found that the applicant had not shown, on the balance of probabilities, that the majority of the information she sought to have amended was incomplete, incorrect or misleading, he found that she had met the burden of proof in respect of two of the amendments sought, and directed that a relevant statement be added to the record.
Date: 19-06-2024
Case Number: OIC-138672-S4H6T2
Public Body: Health Service Executive
Section of the Act.: s.9, s.9(1),
Summary: The Senior Investigator affirmed the decision of the HPRA. He found that it was justified in its decision to grant access to specific information in the record which the applicant argued to be exempt from release under sections 35 and 36 of the FOI Act.
Date: 19-08-2024
Case Number: OIC-145140-K0S8D5
Public Body: Health Products Regulatory Authority
Section of the Act.: s.35, s.35(1), s.36, s.36(1)(b), s.36(1)(c), s.38, s.38(1),
Summary: The Investigator affirmed BIM’s decision.
Date: 16-08-2024
Case Number: OIC-147927-X7R0Z6
Public Body: An Bord Iascaigh Mhara
Section of the Act.: s.15, s.15(1)(a),
Summary: The Investigator varied the University’s decision. She found that it was not justified in its effective refusal to provide a statement of reasons under section 10 and in its refusal of certain email records as outside scope. She remitted these matters for fresh consideration. She found that the University was justified in refusing access to further records relating to the applicant’s request on the basis of section 15(1)(a) of the FOI Act. She found that it was justified in refusing access to certain information on the basis of sections 31(1)(a) and 37(1). She found that it was not justified in refusing access to the remaining information withheld from the records on the basis of sections 29(1), 30(1) and 36(1) and she directed the release of same.
Date: 13-08-2024
Case Number: OIC-144319-H9D2M8
Public Body: University of Limerick
Section of the Act.: s.29,
Summary: Having carried out a review under section 22(2) of the 2014 Act, the Senior Investigator varied the Hospital’s decision. He directed it to grant access to the records subject to the redaction of personal information relating to third-parties other than the applicant and/or her deceased mother.
Date: 13-08-2024
Case Number: OIC-143844-J5G6N1
Public Body: St. James's Hospital
Section of the Act.: s.37, s.37(1), s.37(2), s.37(5), s.37(8),