Mr. Y and The Defence Forces [2022] IEIC OIC-114048 (4 February 2022)
The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to show, on the balance of probabilities, that the date in Part four or the statement in Part five of the AF 667 form was incomplete, incorrect, or misleading. Assertions alone, without supporting evidence, are insufficient to warrant amendment or deletion under section 9 of the FOI Act.
- Citation
- [2022] IEIC OIC-114048
- Parties
- Applicant: Mr. Y; Respondent: The Defence Forces
- Jurisdiction
- Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 04 February 2022
- Procedural Posture
- FOI Amendment Review / Decision of Information Commissioner Under Section 22(2) of the FOI Act
- Outcome
- application refused; decision of Defence Forces affirmed
- Legal Topics
- Amendment of Personal Records, Burden of Proof Under FOI, Standard of Proof in Administrative Review
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mr. Y
Applicant
The Defence Forces
Respondent
Procedural Posture
FOI Amendment Review / Decision of Information Commissioner Under Section 22(2) of the FOI Act
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Defence Forces was justified in refusing to amend the date in Part four of the applicant’s AF 667 form
- 2 Whether the Defence Forces was justified in refusing to delete the statement in Part five of the AF 667 form
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to show, on the balance of probabilities, that the date in Part four or the statement in Part five of the AF 667 form was incomplete, incorrect, or misleading. Assertions alone, without supporting evidence, are insufficient to warrant amendment or deletion under section 9 of the FOI Act.
Court Disposition
application refused; decision of Defence Forces 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