Decisions List

Under article 12(5) of the AIE Regulations, the Commissioner reviewed the decision of the Council. Following the Commissioner's raising of issues concerning the Council's search and records management practice, the Council acknowledged the existence of relevant information which had not been considered at the time of the initial decision or internal review. Accordingly, the Commissioner annulled the decision of the Council, as it was inadequately answered under article 11(5)(b) of the AIE Regulations.

The Commissioner found that one of the withheld records was outside the scope of the request and the remaining records constitute environmental information. Accordingly, the Commissioner annulled CER’s decision and remitted the request to CER to make a fresh decision on the request in accordance with the AIE Regulations.

The Commissioner found that refusal was justified because the Courts Service holds such information on behalf of the Courts in a judicial capacity while acting (in effect) as a servant of the Judiciary. When acting in that capacity the Courts Service is not a public authority within the meaning of article 3(1) the AIE Regulations. Accordingly, the Commissioner affirmed the Courts Service’s decision.

The Commissioner noted that, following the intervention of his Office in the course of this review, EirGrid provided the appellant with access to all of the information which it held it in relation to part (1) of the request. In accordance with article 12(5) of the AIE Regulations, the Commissioner reviewed EirGrid's decision to refuse access to the remaining information. He found that refusal was justified because some of the information is not held and the information which is held is either not environmental information or is environmental information to which the AIE Regulations do not apply by virtue of article 4(1). Accordingly, the Commissioner affirmed EirGrid's decision to refuse those parts of the request.

In accordance with article 12(5) of the AIE Regulations, the Commissioner reviewed EirGrid's decision and found that refusal to provide access to the information requested was not justified on the grounds of commercial or industrial confidentiality by article 9(1)(c). Accordingly, the Commissioner annulled EirGrid's decision and, citing article 12(5)(c), required EirGrid to make the requested information available to the appellant.

In accordance with Article 12(5) of the AIE Regulations, the Commissioner reviewed the decision of BnM and found that it was justified in refusing the request under Articles 7(5), 8(a)(iv), and 9(1)(b) of the Regulations. He affirmed the decision of BnM accordingly.