Mr B and Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council (FOI Act 2014) [2017] IEIC 170090 (19 July 2017)

Mr B and Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council (FOI Act 2014) [2017] IEIC 170090 (19 July 2017)

The Council failed to meet the burden of proof to show it did not control the records, given its foundational and ongoing control over the company, including appointment of directors, approval of major decisions, and ratification of changes to the company's constitution. The Council's refusal under section 15(1)(a)...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] IEIC 170090
Parties
Applicant: Mr B; Respondent: Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
19 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Freedom of Information Review / Decision on Review by Information Commissioner
Outcome
Council's decision annulled; fresh decision required
Legal Topics
Control of Records, Public Body Obligations, FOI Act 2014 Section 15(1)(a), FOI Act 2014 Section 2(5), FOI Act 2014 Section 6(1)(f)
Administrative Law Freedom of Information Control of Records Public Body Obligations FOI Act 2014 Section 15(1)(a) FOI Act 2014 Section 2(5) FOI Act 2014 Section 6(1)(f)

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr B

Applicant

Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Freedom of Information Review / Decision on Review by Information Commissioner

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Council was justified in refusing access to records on the basis that it did not hold or control them under the FOI Act 2014

Ratio Decidendi

The Council failed to meet the burden of proof to show it did not control the records, given its foundational and ongoing control over the company, including appointment of directors, approval of major decisions, and ratification of changes to the company's constitution. The Council's refusal under section 15(1)(a) was not justified.

Court Disposition

Council's decision annulled; fresh decision required

Orders

  • Council to undertake a fresh decision-making process on the applicant's request within statutory timeframes