Ms X. and a Public Body [2013] IEIC 120333 (24 September 2013)

Ms X. and a Public Body [2013] IEIC 120333 (24 September 2013)

The Body could not rely on section 10(1)(c) because it failed to comply with the assistance requirement in section 10(2), and its reasons for invoking section 10(1)(e) were not appropriate in the circumstances. The refusal was therefore not justified.

Citation
[2013] IEIC 120333
Parties
Applicant: Ms X.; Respondent: A Public Body
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
24 September 2013
Procedural Posture
FOI Review Application / Review by Information Commissioner
Outcome
Refusal annulled; fresh decision required
Legal Topics
FOI Refusal, Frivolous or Vexatious Requests, Substantial and Unreasonable Interference, Internal Review Rights
Administrative Law Freedom of Information FOI Refusal Frivolous or Vexatious Requests Substantial and Unreasonable Interference Internal Review Rights

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms X.

Applicant

A Public Body

Respondent

Procedural Posture

FOI Review Application / Review by Information Commissioner

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Body was justified in refusing the applicant's FOI request under sections 10(1)(c) and 10(1)(e) of the FOI Act

Ratio Decidendi

The Body could not rely on section 10(1)(c) because it failed to comply with the assistance requirement in section 10(2), and its reasons for invoking section 10(1)(e) were not appropriate in the circumstances. The refusal was therefore not justified.

Court Disposition

Refusal annulled; fresh decision required

Orders

  • The Body's refusal of the request is annulled.
  • The Body must undertake a fresh decision-making process and inform the applicant of the outcome in accordance with the FOI Act.