Decisions

The Commissioner found that the document at issue is ''environmental information'' within the meaning of paragraph (c) of the definition in article 3(1) of the AIE Regulations. He annulled ESB's decision and directed it to undertake a fresh decision-making process in respect of the document.

The Commissioner found that DPER had not complied with its obligations under the AIE Regulations when processing the appellant's request and remitted the matter to DPER for further consideration.

The Commissioner found that the information sought was environmental information, and that refusal was not justified by article 8(a)(iv), 9(2)(c) or 9(2)(d) of the AIE Regulations. On that basis, the Commissioner annulled the decision of the DPC and directed release of the information sought

The Commissioner annulled the decision of An Garda Síochána and remitted the request to An Garda Síochána for a fresh decision-making process.

The Commissioner remitted the request back to the NTA for a fresh decision-making process

The Commissioner found that information received by a staff member of a public authority orally and not recorded was not information in a "material form" and therefore did not come within the definition of "environmental information" contained in the Regulations. Nonetheless, he found that ABP had not conducted reasonable and appropriate searches to identify and retrieve environmental information within the scope of the appellant's request and he remitted the matter to ABP for further consideration

The Commissioner annulled NSAI's decision to give access to the standards at issue by way of in situ examination free of charge subject to the acceptance of terms under article 7(3)(a)(ii) of the AIE Regulations on the ground that NSAI did not, in either the original decision or the internal review decision, follow the process as set out in the AIE Regulations. He directed NSAI to undertake a fresh decision-making process in respect of the appellants' request in accordance with the AIE Regulations.

The Commissioner found that: (i) the requested information is environmental information; (ii) article 7(3) of the Regulations did not apply in the circumstances of the case; (iii) article 9(2)(c) of the Regulations did not provide grounds for refusal of the information as the public interest in disclosure outweighed any interest in refusal; and (iv) the existence of the licensing agreement with OSI did not provide grounds for refusal of the request.

The Commissioner found that the DPC is a public authority within the definition provided by the AIE Regulations and that the information sought was environmental information. He found that refusal of the requested information was not justified under article 8(a)(iv), 9(1)(d), 9(2)(c) or 9(2)(d) of the AIE Regulations. He annulled the decision of the DPC and directed the release of the information sought.

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.