Decisions

The Commissioner found that the Council failed to demonstrate that adequate steps were taken to identify and locate all relevant environmental information held by it. Therefore, the Council was not justified in refusing access to environmental information on the basis that no relevant environmental information was held by or for it.

The Commissioner found that the request has not been dealt with in accordance with Article 4(5) of the Directive because the Department has: A) failed to give sufficient reasons under the AIE Regulations for refusing to release all records relating to the development of a procedure by the Forest Service for addressing any issues regarding the construction of potentially unsanctioned Forest Roads. B) failed to carry out the balancing test required by article 10(3)-(5) of the AIE Regulations and to give reasons for its conclusion, when attempting to rely on an exception in respect of its refusal to provide the information requested.

The Commissioner affirmed the refusal of the request, but varied the reasons, finding that the refusal was justified under Article 7(5) of the AIE Regulations.

The Commissioner found that RTÉ is a "public authority" and that the information at issue was "environmental information" within the meaning of article 3(1) of the AIE Regulations.

The Commissioner annulled the Department's decision on the ground that it had not conducted adequate searches in an effort to locate all relevant environmental information. He directed it to undertake a fresh decision-making process in respect of the appellant's request.

The Commissioner annulled Coillte's decision. He directed Coillte to undertake a fresh decision making process in respect of each of the 19 requests.

The Commissioner found that the Council's refusal to provide access to the information requested was not justified under article 9(2)(a). He directed the Council to undertake a fresh decision-making process.

The Commissioner found that ABP was not acting in a judicial capacity and was therefore a "public authority" for the purposes of the appeal. He also found that article 8(a)(iv) did not provide grounds for refusal and directed release of the information requested.

The Commissioner found that the request has not been dealt with in accordance with Article 4(5) of the Directive. The Commissioner therefore annulled the Department's decision and remitted the matter for fresh consideration by the Department.

The Commissioner annulled the decision of the Council and directed release of some of the information identified as relevant to the request. He directed the Council to carry out a fresh decision-making process in respect of the remaining documents.