The Applicant and Forth Valley NHS Board [2020] ScotIC 058_2020 (15 June 2020)

The Commissioner determined whether the requested information constituted personal data and if disclosure would breach data protection principles, balancing public interest against privacy rights.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2020] ScotIC 058_2020
Parties: Applicant: The Applicant; Respondent: Forth Valley NHS Board
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 15 June 2020
Procedural Posture: Freedom of Information Appeal / Final Decision
Outcome: partially upheld
Legal Topics: Freedom of Information, Disclosure of Qualifications, Public Authority Obligations

Information Law Health Law Freedom of Information Disclosure of Qualifications Public Authority Obligations

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2

Parties

The Applicant

Applicant

Forth Valley NHS Board

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Freedom of Information Appeal / Final Decision

Legal Issues

1 Whether Forth Valley NHS Board was required to disclose qualifications and experience of named doctors under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002

Ratio Decidendi

The Commissioner determined whether the requested information constituted personal data and if disclosure would breach data protection principles, balancing public interest against privacy rights.

Court Disposition

partially upheld

Orders

Forth Valley NHS Board must disclose the qualifications and experience of named doctors to the extent that such disclosure does not breach data protection principles

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.