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 >> Bath and North East Somerset Council (Local government (District council)) [2007] UKICO FS50094281 (17 May 2007) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKICO/2007/FS50094281.html Cite as: [2007] UKICO FS50094281 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
17 May 2007, Local government (District council)
The complainant requested access to information held by the Assistant Director of Environmental Services at the Council, regarding the Former Fuller Earthworks Site. Although the Council disclosed the information it held, the complainant remained dissatisfied with how the information had been presented and felt for this reason that the Council had not complied with the Act. The complainant requested the Council to resend the information but in a different format. As correspondence continued the Council agreed to reconsider the way the information was supplied and the possibility of resending the information in the manner the complainant required. The Council concluded that it was unwilling to comply with the complainant’s wishes as it would simply be resending the same information to that already provided. The Council informed the complainant that it had already supplied the information held and had therefore met its obligations under the Act. The Commissioner was asked to consider the case and he concluded that the Council had supplied the information it held and had therefore dealt with the complainant’s information request in accordance with section 1 of the Act. In respect of the way the information was communicated to the complainant, the Commissioner concluded that section 11 of the Act could not be applied in this case, as the complainant made no specific request to receive the information in a particular format at the time of making his initial request to the Council.
FOI 1: Not upheld