Decision 023/2008 - Paul Drury and Glasgow City Council
Mr Drury asked the Council to provide him with details of the transport and hotel costs associated with Glasgow's bid to stage the 2014 Commonwealth Games.
The Council refused Mr Drury's request, arguing that the release would harm both the effective conduct of public affairs (section 30 of the FOI Act) and the economic interests of the whole or part of the UK (section 33(2)(a)).
This case was the first in which I have been required to consider the section 33(2)(a) exemption in a decision. The Council argued that releasing the information sought by Mr Drury prior to the Commonwealth Games Federation's decision on where to stage the 2014 games may have had a detrimental effect on Glasgow's bid. The Council argued that, should this contribute towards a decision by the Federation not to stage the games in Glasgow, it would harm the economic interests of both Glasgow and Scotland as a whole.
I was not, however, persuaded that the disclosure of the information would have a harmful effect on Glasgow's chances of winning the bid, and did not accept that disclosure would have the economic impact foreseen by the Council. I also did not find that disclosure would harm the effective conduct of public affairs.
I therefore ordered the Council to release the information to Mr Drury.
Decision 002/2008- Ms Diana Cairns and the City of Edinburgh Council
My decision in relation to this application represents another first - in this case the first time that I have ordered the release of legal advice in circumstances where I have concluded that legal professional privilege has been waived.
The FOI Act contains an exemption under which authorities can withhold information where a claim to confidentiality of communications could be maintained in legal proceedings. This exemption will commonly cover the communications between a solicitor and their client, which will normally be subject to legal professional privilege.
In this case, however, I found that the substance of the information requested by Ms Cairns - legal advice in relation to a proposed development on Portobello Park and Golf Course - had been disclosed to a significant extent by the Council in publicly accessible committee minutes. As a result, I concluded that this public disclosure had the effect of waiving the Council's right to legal professional privilege in relation to that information.
On this basis, I found that the relevant exemption could not be applied, and required that the legal advice be released to Ms Cairns.
Decision 030/2008 - Mark Nixon and Glasgow City Council
Under the FOI Act information can be withheld by a public authority where it is due to be published within 12 weeks of the request. The Council applied this exemption in response to Mr Nixon's request for information on the Council's pay and benefits review.
For the exemption to be appropriately applied, however, an authority must demonstrate that the information was held with a view to being published within 12 weeks of the request at the time the request was made, and that it is reasonable for it to withhold the information until that time.
In this case, while it was clear that the Council intended to publish some information at some point in the future, I was not satisfied that the information was held with a view to being published within 12 weeks of the information request. I therefore found that the Council had failed in its obligations under the FOI Act by not providing the relevant information in response to Mr Nixon's request.
The full text of all decisions issued under Scotland's FOI legislation can be viewed on my website at: www.itspublicknowledge.info/decisions
Unless otherwise stated, the decisions listed may be appealed by either party to the Court of Session on a point of law. Any such appeal must be made within 42 days of the date of intimation on the decision.