Information Commissioner's Office

Kent County Council

13 April 2015, Local government (County council)

The complainant has requested information in relation to meetings the Leader of Kent County Council (the council) had with regards to East Kent Opportunities LPP (EKO) over a two year period. The council provided some information but refused the remaining as it considered the information to be commercially sensitive. Following an internal review, the council amended its refusal to instead rely on section 36(2)(b) and (c) of the FOIA. During the Commissioner’s initial investigations, he asked the council to consider whether the response should have been made under the EIR. With this, the council sought to rely on 12(4)(e) of the EIR – Internal Communications – and considered 12(5)(d) of the EIR – Proceedings protected by law, in this case litigation privilege and legal advice privilege – would also apply to two of the three briefing notes being withheld. The complainant has advised the Commissioner he does not consider the information should be withheld. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council has correctly relied on regulation 12(4)(e) of the EIR to withhold the two briefing notes that the council also considered were exempt under 12(5)(d). So he has not gone on to consider the application of 12(5)(d). The Commissioner has also determined that the briefing note, which is a minute meeting attended by the then Chief Executive of the TDC dated 23 October 2013, is not covered by regulation 12(4)(e) of the EIR. The council did not apply any other exception to this information. The Commissioner requires the public authority provide the complainant with a copy of the minute meeting attended by the then Chief Executive of the TDC dated 23 October 2013.

EIR 12(4)(e): Partly upheld