Stoke-on-Trent City Council (Local government) [2023] UKICO 247319 (9 October 2023)
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!
[New search]
[Printable PDF version]
[Help]
Stoke-on-Trent City Council
The complainant requested a specified “due diligence” report connected to a proposed development site at Spode. Stoke-on-Trent City Council (the ‘Council’) ultimately disclosed the report with parts of it redacted under the following EIR exceptions: • Regulation 12(4)(e) – the disclosure of internal communications • Regulation 12(5)(e) – the confidentiality of commercial or industrial information • Regulation 12(5)(f) – the interests of the person who provided the information • Regulation 13 – personal data During the Commissioner’s investigation, the Council disclosed the names of two individuals named in the report. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council has properly relied on Regulations 12(4)(e), 12(5)(e) and 13(1) of the EIR to withhold the remaining redactions within the disclosed report. Given that Regulation 12(5)(f) has been cited in addition to Regulation 12(5)(e) (and in some cases to both Regulations 12(5)(e) and 13(1)) for some parts of the report, the Commissioner has not deemed it necessary to consider the Council’s application of Regulation 12(5)(f). No steps are required as a result of this notice. Keywords/themes: Levelling up policy
EIR 13(1):
Complaint not upheld
EIR 12(4)(e):
Complaint not upheld
EIR 12(5)(e):
Complaint not upheld
Decision notice: 247319
BAILII:
Copyright Policy |
Disclaimers |
Privacy Policy |
Feedback |
Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKICO/2023/247319.html
