ICO - FS50819531: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:34, 20 January 2020

ICO - FS50819531

Authority:	ICO (UK)
Jurisdiction:	United Kingdom
Relevant Law:	Article 4(1) GDPR Article 5(1)(a) GDPR Article 6(1)(f) GDPR Section 3(2) DPA 40(2) FOIA
Type:	Complaint
Outcome:	Rejected
Decided:	28.10.2019
Published:	n/a
Fine:	none
Parties:	Pendle Borough Council Vs. anonymous
National Case Number:	FS50819531
European Case Law Identifier:	n/a
Appeal:	n/a
Original Language:	English
Original Source:	ICO (EN)

ICO issued a decision regarding access to third party personal data.

English Summary

Facts

The complainant has requested a copy of an inspection report named kennels to the Pendle Borough Council (the Council). The Council refused as it considered it to be third party personal data under 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The complainant challenged the decision before the ICO.

Dispute

Is the information personal data? Would disclosure contravene GDPR principles ? Which are the legitimate interest at stake? Is disclosure necessary?

Holding

The ICO confirmed that the requested information was considered to be personal data pursuant to Section 3(2) of the Data Protection Act (DPA) and Article 4(1) GDPR. Pursuant to the FOIA and the GDPR, the ICO balanced the right to information and the protection of the personal data at issue in order to assess if the disclosure would contravene Article (1)(a) GDPR principle. It found that the access to information request did not override the third party right to privacy. The ICO found that the refusal of disclosure was justified and it was legitimate to withhold the information under section 40(2) of the FOIA by virtue of section 40(3A)(a) for transparency purposes.

Comment

Share your comments here!

Further Resources

Share blogs or news articles here!

English official version

 to be completed..

@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 ===Dispute===
-Is the information personal data? Would disclosure contravene GDPR principles ? Which are the legitimate interest at stake? Is disclosure is necessary ?
+Is the information personal data? Would disclosure contravene GDPR principles ? Which are the legitimate interest at stake? Is disclosure necessary?
 ===Holding===
-The ICO confirmed that the requested information was considered to be personal data pursuant ot Section 3(2) of the Data Protection Act (DPA) and Article 4(1) GDPR. Pursuant to the FOIA and the GDPR, the ICO balanced the right to information and the protection of the personal data at issue in order to assess if the disclosure would contravene Article (1)(a) GDPR principle. It found that the access to information request did not override the third party right to privacy. The ICO found that the refusal of disclosure was justified and it was legitimate to withhold the information under section 40(2) of the FOIA by virtue of section 40(3A)(a) for transparency purposes.
+The ICO confirmed that the requested information was considered to be personal data pursuant to Section 3(2) of the Data Protection Act (DPA) and Article 4(1) GDPR. Pursuant to the FOIA and the GDPR, the ICO balanced the right to information and the protection of the personal data at issue in order to assess if the disclosure would contravene Article (1)(a) GDPR principle. It found that the access to information request did not override the third party right to privacy. The ICO found that the refusal of disclosure was justified and it was legitimate to withhold the information under section 40(2) of the FOIA by virtue of section 40(3A)(a) for transparency purposes.
 ==Comment==