BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
Information Commissioner's Office |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Information Commissioner's Office >> Great Yarmouth and Waveney Primary Care Trust (Decision Notice) [2012] UKICO FS50419726 (05 March 2012) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKICO/2012/FS50419726.html Cite as: [2012] UKICO FS50419726 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Summary: The complainant made three requests to the Trust. He asked for information including some practice-™s policies on prescribing generic drugs, the incentives around them and other connected staffing details. The Trust answered two of the requests and applied section 14(2) [repeated request] to the third request. It also explained that it would not answer any other questions of this nature in future. The complainant was not happy with either the answers that he received, or the application of section 14(2) and referred his complaint to the Information Commissioner (-˜the Commissioner-™). During the investigation, the Trust applied section 14(1) [vexatious requests] to the three requests in question. Having considered both sides-™ arguments, the Commissioner considers that the Trust was entitled to apply section 14(1) in this case as the requests were vexatious. However, he did find a procedural breach of section 17(5) because the Trust never issued a refusal notice to the complainant informing him it was relying on this exemption. He also finds that the refusal notice it did issue was not specific enough to comply with section 17(6) and stop it needing to issue a response in the future. He requires no remedial steps to be taken in this case because this notice explains why the requests could be objectively seen as being vexatious. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2012/0061 struck out.
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: FOI 14 - Complaint Not upheld, FOI 17 - Complaint Upheld
