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 >> Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Education (Other)) [2015] UKICO FS50571019 (10 August 2015) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKICO/2015/FS50571019.html Cite as: [2015] UKICO FS50571019 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
10 August 2015, Education (Other)
The complainant has requested information regarding the calculation of the calorific value of gas used by gas supply companies when billing customers. The request comprised of 5 questions. Ofgem acknowledged that it held information relevant to the request but refused to provide the information under section 31- law enforcement, section 42 – legal professional privilege and section 44 – statutory prohibition on disclosure. During the Commissioner’s investigation Ofgem also introduced the exemption provided by section 35 – development and formulation of government policy and explained that it did not hold the information requested in the third question of the request. However it said it was happy to provide direct answers to the first and fourth questions. The Commissioner’s decision is that by failing to provide the information requested in the first and fourth question to the complainant Ofgem breached section 1, however as that matter has been resolved by the issuing of this notice, the Commissioner does not require Ofgem to take any further action. The Commissioner is satisfied that Ofgem does not hold the information sought by the third question and that Ofgem is entitled to rely on section 44 to refuse the information sought by the second and fifth question. He has not gone on to consider the application of sections 31, 35 and 42. The Commissioner does not require the public authority to take any further action in this matter.
FOI 1: Upheld FOI 44: Not upheld