Mr X and TUSLA [2015] IEIC 140115 (13 March 2015)
The Agency was justified in refusing access to the withheld records because they were exempt under legal professional privilege, the in camera rule, or contained joint personal information not solely relating to the applicant, and none of the statutory exceptions or public interest considerations warranted release.
- Citation
- [2015] IEIC 140115
- Parties
- Applicant: Mr X; Respondent: TUSLA
- Jurisdiction
- Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 13 March 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Freedom of Information Review / Final Decision by Information Commissioner
- Outcome
- decision affirmed
- Legal Topics
- FOI Exemptions, Legal Professional Privilege, In Camera Rule, Personal Information, Public Interest, Access to Minors' Records
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mr X
Applicant
TUSLA
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Freedom of Information Review / Final Decision by Information Commissioner
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Agency was justified in refusing access to records under sections 22(1)(a), 22(1)(b), and 28 of the FOI Act
- 2 Application of legal professional privilege
- 3 Application of the in camera rule to family law proceedings
Ratio Decidendi
The Agency was justified in refusing access to the withheld records because they were exempt under legal professional privilege, the in camera rule, or contained joint personal information not solely relating to the applicant, and none of the statutory exceptions or public interest considerations warranted release.
Court Disposition
decision affirmed
Orders
- Agency's refusal of access to withheld records under sections 22(1)(a), 22(1)(b), and 28 of the FOI Act is affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment