Decisions

The Commissioner found that reasonable and appropriate searches had been undertaken to identify and retrieve environmental information within the scope of the appellant’s request and affirmed the Department’s decision.

The Commissioner found that the Department had failed to adhere to the timelines for decision-making as set out in article 7(8) of the AIE Regulations, but did ultimately release all requested information to the appellant.

The Commissioner found that the Council was justified in refusing part of the request under article 7(5) of the AIE Regulations as it does not hold the records in question. The Council was not justified in redacting information from the records which were released. The Commissioner directed release of the relevant unredacted records.

The Commissioner affirmed the Department's decision to refuse access to the information sought on the basis that it is not "environmental information" within the meaning of the definition in article 3(1) of the AIE Regulations.

The Commissioner found that article 9(2)(a) of the Regulations did not provide grounds for refusal and remitted the matter to the OPW for fresh consideration.

The Commissioner found that the Department was not justified in refusing the information sought on the basis that it was not environmental information. He annulled the Department's decision and remitted the matter for full consideration of the request.

The Commissioner found that the Department had not established that reasonable and appropriate searches had been conducted to identify and retrieve environmental information within the scope of the appellant's request and remitted the matter to the Department for further consideration.

The Commissioner found that the Department had not complied with its obligations under article 7(3) as it had failed to provide environmental information to the appellant in the form or manner requested by her in circumstances where none of the exceptions contained in article 7(3) could be said to apply.

The Commissioner found that the requested information was held by ESBNDAC within the meaning of the AIE Regulations. He annulled the decision of ESBNDAC and directed that a fresh decision-making process be carried out.

The Commissioner found that the Paul Hogarth Company is not a public authority within the meaning of the definition in article 3(1) of the AIE Regulations. Accordingly, the Company was not obliged to process the appellant’s request for access to environmental information. The Commissioner has no further jurisdiction in relation to this matter.