Mr Conor Ryan and the Irish Greyhound Board [2015] IEIC 120179 (25 March 2015)

Mr Conor Ryan and the Irish Greyhound Board [2015] IEIC 120179 (25 March 2015)

The Information Commissioner found that the IGB was justified in refusing access to certain records under sections 10(1)(a), 22(1)(a), 27(1)(b), 28(1), and 46(1)(c)(ii) of the FOI Act, but was not satisfied that all reasonable searches had been conducted for Items 2, 5, and 7, and annulled the IGB's decision on those items, directing a fresh decision-making process.

Citation
[2015] IEIC 120179
Parties
Applicant: Mr Conor Ryan; Respondent: Irish Greyhound Board
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
25 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Freedom of Information Review / Final Decision by Information Commissioner
Outcome
Varied and partly annulled
Legal Topics
Access to Information, Records Management, Exemptions Under FOI Act, Personal Information, Commercial Sensitivity, Legal Professional Privilege
Administrative Law Freedom of Information Access to Information Records Management Exemptions Under FOI Act Personal Information Commercial Sensitivity Legal Professional Privilege

Case Brief

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 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Conor Ryan

Applicant

Irish Greyhound Board

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Freedom of Information Review / Final Decision by Information Commissioner

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the IGB was justified in refusing access to records under various sections of the FOI Act
  2. 2 Whether all reasonable steps were taken to locate records
  3. 3 Whether exemptions for personal information, commercial sensitivity, and legal professional privilege apply

Ratio Decidendi

The Information Commissioner found that the IGB was justified in refusing access to certain records under sections 10(1)(a), 22(1)(a), 27(1)(b), 28(1), and 46(1)(c)(ii) of the FOI Act, but was not satisfied that all reasonable searches had been conducted for Items 2, 5, and 7, and annulled the IGB's decision on those items, directing a fresh decision-making process.

Court Disposition

Varied and partly annulled

Orders

  • FOI Act does not apply to Item 10 under Section 46(1)(c)(ii).
  • Section 10(1)(a) applies to further records for Items 1, 6, 12, and 13 (do not exist or cannot be found).